JUDGMENT S.K. Dubey, J. 1. The insurance company, aggrieved of the award dated 30.7.1992 passed in Claim Case No. 18 of 1989 by the Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Multai, district Betul, has filed this appeal. 2. In a motor accident which occurred on 21.5.1989, Baburao, the husband of respondent No. 1 and son Anil died. Respondent No. 1 filed two separate applications to claim compensation (i) for the death of Baburao (Claim Case No. 17 of 1989) and for the death of Anil (Claim Case No. 18 of 1989). Both the cases were decided by the common award passed on 30.7.1992. The insurance company filed Misc. Appeal No. 479 of 1993 against the award passed in Claim Case No. 17 of 1989 which was later on withdrawn. However, the present appeal is not withdrawn as, according to the appellant, the compensation awarded for the death of Anil, is excessive as the deceased aged 25 years was a student and was a non-earning member. 3. The Tribunal on the evidence of Dwarkabai, AW 1, found that the deceased was earning Rs. 2,000/- p.m., assessed the dependency at Rs. 500/- p.m. and applying the multiplier of 35, passed the award of Rs. 2,10,000/-. It was submitted that when the deceased Anil was a student, the story of his earning is false. 4. Mr. S.L. Kochar, learned Counsel for respondent No. 1, submitted that in the family besides respondent No. 1, there are three minor sisters and one minor brother of the deceased. The father and son both were earning. Deceased father used to visit outside the village while the son used to sit in the pan shop. Hence the award cannot be said to be excessive. 5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, even assuming that the deceased may not be contributing Rs. 500/- per month, in Second Schedule under Section 163A of the Act, which was inserted w.e.f. from 14.11.1994, the compensation is to be assessed taking into consideration the yearly income as Rs. 15,000/- but as the accident occurred prior to insertion of the Schedule, therefore, we take the figure of Rs. 1,000/- per month as minimum wages of the deceased, yearly Rs. 12,000/-, wherein a deduction of 1/3rd is given for the personal living expenses of the deceased, contribution to the family in round figure would come to Rs. 670/-. 15,000/- but as the accident occurred prior to insertion of the Schedule, therefore, we take the figure of Rs. 1,000/- per month as minimum wages of the deceased, yearly Rs. 12,000/-, wherein a deduction of 1/3rd is given for the personal living expenses of the deceased, contribution to the family in round figure would come to Rs. 670/-. Applying the multiplier of 16 looking to the age of the deceased and the dependants, the amount would come to Rs. 1,28,640/-. In that Rs. 2,000/- be further added towards the funeral expenses, the amount would come to Rs. 1,30,640/-to which the respondent No. 1 would be entitled, with interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum from the date of application till payment. The appellant company shall deposit the amount less the amount already deposited by it within a period of two months from the date of supply of the certified copy of the order, failing which the amount of Rs. 1,30,640/- shall carry interest at the rate of 15 per cent instead of 12 per cent till deposit. On deposit, the amount will be disbursed in accordance with the guidelines laid down by the Supreme Court in General Manager, Kerala State Road Trans. Corporation v. Susamma Thomas 1994 ACJ 1 (SC) and Lilaben Udesing Gohel v. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. 1996 ACJ 673 (SC). 6. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed. The award in Claim Case No. 18 of 1989 shall stand modified as indicated above. In the circumstances, the parties shall bear their own costs. Record of the case be sent back to the Tribunal posthaste with the copy of the order. C.C. as per rules to parties.