JUDGMENT S.K. Dubey, J. 1. National Insurance Co. the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, aggrieved of Ltd. by joining the owner of the vehicle the award dated 13.1.1994 passed in Claim has filed this appeal under Section 173 of Case No. 8 of 1992 by Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Satna. 2. On 22.12.1989 in a motor accident one Harish Kumar aged about 24 years died. The accident was caused due to rash and negligent driving of the truck bearing registration No. MP 1710 owned and driven by Jamuna Prasad, the appellant No. 2 and insured by appellant No. 1. The respondents claimed compensation of Rs. 10,00,000/-. On the evidence adduced by the parties the Tribunal held that the accident was caused because of rash and negligent driving of the truck. This finding is not seriously challenged. 3. However, the appellants submit that compensation awarded is highly excessive. The deceased was earning Rs. 1,500 per month while the widow in her statement stated that the deceased was giving Rs. 20/- per day for meeting daily expenses of the house. It is also submitted that the multiplier of 20 applied is against the settled principles of law as laid down in the case of General Manager, Kerala State Road Trans. Corporation v. Susamma Thomas 1994 ACJ 1 (SC) and a decision of this Court in State of Madhya Pradesh through Collector, Jhabua v. Ashadevi 1988 ACJ 846 (MP). The determination of dependency at the rate of Rs. 1,200/- and application of multiplier of 20 and calculation of the compensation of Rs. 2,88,000/- with interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum from the date of application till realisation is excessive which deserves to be reduced. 4. Learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the deceased was in the threshold of his career who used to give Rs. 20/- per day to meet the day-to-day expenses which do not include the other expenditure of the members of the family. Therefore, the dependency determined by the Tribunal is correct. 5. On proved facts the deceased was 24 years of age, who left his young widow and mother. In computing dependency the personal living expenses of the deceased V3rd amount deserves to be reduced, whereby the monthly dependency comes to Rs. 1,000/- and yearly Rs. 12,000/- in which the multiplier of 16 is to be applied. [See Ashadevi's case 1988 ACJ 846 (MP)]. In computing dependency the personal living expenses of the deceased V3rd amount deserves to be reduced, whereby the monthly dependency comes to Rs. 1,000/- and yearly Rs. 12,000/- in which the multiplier of 16 is to be applied. [See Ashadevi's case 1988 ACJ 846 (MP)]. By applying the multiplier of 16 to multiplicand of Rs. 12,000/- the amount of compensation will come to Rs. 1,92,000/-to that an amount of Rs. 10,000/- is to be added in the head of consortium. The just compensation comes to Rs. 2,02,000/-to which the claimants are entitled with interest at 12 per cent per annum from the date of the application, i.e., 3.2.1990 till payment. 6. In the result, appeal is partly allowed, the amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is reduced as indicated hereinabove, the appellant insurance company shall deposit the amount within a period of two months from today, of course, after adjustment of the amount already deposited with its proportionate interest, failing which the amount shall carry interest at the rate of 18 per cent per annum till deposit. On deposit of the amount, the Tribunal shall disburse the amount to the claimants keeping into consideration the guidelines laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Susamma Thomas 1994 ACJ 1 (SC). 7. In the circumstances of the case the parties shall bear their own costs.