JUDGMENT R.D. Shukla, J. 1. The appeal is directed against the judgment and award dated 7.3.1986 of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, West Nimar, Mandleshwar, in claim case No. 6/84, whereby the claimants-appellants have been awarded a compensation of Rs. 32,000/- in all. 2. The brief history of the case is that deceased Mohanlal was working as second driver for motor truck No. MPI 4841 and the same was owned by respondent No. 2 and was driven by second driver respondent No. 1. The vehicle was ensured with respondent No. 3. It is alleged that Shantilal was driving the vehicle at the relevant time. He was so rash and negligent in driving the vehicle that the truck left the road, turn turtle. Mohanlal came beneath the truck, sustained injury and died in consequence thereof. As such the claimants filed claim petition for getting compensation of Rs. 4,25,000/-. Claimant-appellant No. 1 is the widow, claimant Nos. 2 & 3 are father & mother of the deceased. Claimant Nos. 4, 5 & 6 are brothers and sisters of the deceased. The respondents Nos. 1 & 2 were proceeded ex parte. However respondent No. 3, Insurance Company contested the case and pleaded that Shantilal did not have a valid driving licence. 3. The learned Tribunal has given a finding that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving by Shantilal and Mohanlal died in consequence thereof. He was aged about 38 years, and as such the Tribunal awarded a compensation of Rs. 32,000/- in all. Hence this appeal for enhancement. 4. The contention of the learned Counsel for the appellants is that the learned Tribunal has assessed the dependency on the lower side and further applied multiplier of 7 which is also on the lower side. As the claimant Nos. 1 is young widow, the deceased was eldest son of claimant Nos. 2 & 3 and they had a chance of further survival at least for 25-30 years. 5. We were taken to the evidence. We have perused the record. Learned Tribunal has accepted the contention of the claimants that deceased was getting Rs. 1,000/- per month as pay plus some money as allowance while in duty being on tour with the vehicle. The learned Tribunal has assessed dependency at the rate of Rs. 300/- per month i.e., Rs.3,600/- per year. We have perused the record. Learned Tribunal has accepted the contention of the claimants that deceased was getting Rs. 1,000/- per month as pay plus some money as allowance while in duty being on tour with the vehicle. The learned Tribunal has assessed dependency at the rate of Rs. 300/- per month i.e., Rs.3,600/- per year. Though it is true that claimants No. 1 had no child from the deceased and therefore there are chances of remarriage despite the denial by the claimant No. 1, but the deceased was eldest son of claimant Nos. 2 & 3 he must have helped them in their old age, and if normal age is taken to be 65 years there were chances of their servival for about 20-25 years. Though it is also true that the deceased may have spent something more on his family after procreating children, but expenditure on his person should not be taken more than l/3rd. Thus, taking the income as Rs. 1,000/- per month i.e., Rs. 12,000/- per year the dependency of the family ought to have been determined as Rs. 8,000/- per year. The income of the deceased which he was getting while out of station with the vehicle cannot be taken into account as the same was paid because the person was out of head quarter. 6. If the dependency is taken to be Rs. 8,000/- per year, and a multiplier of 8 is applied the amount would come to Rs. 64,000/-. The learned Tribunal has awarded Rs. 7,000/- for the loss of consortium to claimant No. 1 and loss of love & affection to claimant Nos. 2 & 3, that appears to be just and proper. Thus, the total amount of compensation comes to Rs. 64,000/- plus Rs. 7,000/- = Rs. 71,000/-. We are of the opinion that the claimants are entitled to that much of compensation. If Rs. 71,000/- is kept in a fixed deposit the same is likely to fetch Rs. 700/- per month by way of interest. We, therefore, held that Rs. 71,000/- is just and proper compensation in the case. 7. As a result, the appeal is accepted. The amount as awarded by the learned Tribunal is enhanced to Rs. 71,000/- with interest at the same rate as awarded by the Tribunal from the date of application till realisation. It is further directed that on deposited the money, Rs. 71,000/- is just and proper compensation in the case. 7. As a result, the appeal is accepted. The amount as awarded by the learned Tribunal is enhanced to Rs. 71,000/- with interest at the same rate as awarded by the Tribunal from the date of application till realisation. It is further directed that on deposited the money, Rs. 20,000/- be kept in a fix deposit in the name of claimant No. 1 for a period of 15 years. She shall be entitled to the interest accruing thereon. Similarly, Rs. 20,000/- each shall be deposited in the name of claimant-appellant Nos. 2 & 3 for a period of 10 years. They shall be entitled to receive quarterly interest accruing thereon. Rest of the amount may be paid to the claimants jointly with l/3rd share to claimant No. 1 and the rest of it to all the claimants. Respondents shall pay the cost, to the appellants. Counsel fee Rs. 500/-.