JUDGMENT 1. - These appeals are directed against the Award dated 19.9.1997 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Doogarpur whereby the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (for short 'the Tribunal') awarded a sum of Rs. 2,22,000/- in favour of the claimants-respondents in Appeal No. 127 of 1998 and a sum of Rs. 1,14,500/- in favour of the claimants-respondents in Appeal No. 129 of 1998. 2. The brief facts of these appeals are that on 14.9.1996 at about 11.00 p.m., Bhagwanlal, Shrinarayan, Shri Tulsiram, Nathu, Velji, Kacharu, Nathuram, Ganeshlal, Vinod Kumar, Bhagwati Lal and Vinod Kumar and Jeep Driver Puroshottam were travelling in Jeep No. RJ-12/T-0027 from Baroda to Ramdeora. The Jeep was being driven at a moderate speed. It is alleged that on 15.9.1997 at about 7.40 a.m., when the said Jeep reached National Highway No. 14 which goes from Sumerpur to Pali, Bus No. RJ-16/P-0121 of Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation coming from opposite side at a fast speed dashed against the Jeep. As a result of that, the Jeep lost its control and it was totally smashed. That resulted into the death of Shri Narayan, Shri Tulsi and Shri Nathu on the spot and Velji died during his treatment in the Hospital. Bhagwanlal and Vinod Kumar also received simple and grievous injuries on their person. 3. A report of this incident was lodged at Police Station, Gundadia by Puroshottam, the Driver of the Jeep. After investigation, the police filed a challan in the Court of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Pali. 4. Thereafter, the dependents of deceased-Nathu filed Claim Petition No. 203 of 1996 for a sum of Rs. 11,03,500/- and the dependents of deceased Narayan filed Claim Petition No. 204 of 1996 for a sum of Rs. 7,36,000/-. 5. The respondents filed their reply before the Tribunal in each claim case. The issues were framed and evidence was recorded. Thereafter, the learned Tribunal decided the above claim petitions vide its Award dated 19.9.1997 awarding a sum of Rs. 2,22,000/- in favour of the claimants-respondents of Appeal No. 127 of 1998 and a sum of Rs. 1,14,500/- in favour of the claimants-respondents of Appeal No. 129 of 1998. Hence this appeal by the appellant. 6. I have heard Mr. Sangeet Lodha, the learned counsel appearing for the appellant in each case and have very carefully gone through the impugned Award passed by the learned Tribunal. 7. 1,14,500/- in favour of the claimants-respondents of Appeal No. 129 of 1998. Hence this appeal by the appellant. 6. I have heard Mr. Sangeet Lodha, the learned counsel appearing for the appellant in each case and have very carefully gone through the impugned Award passed by the learned Tribunal. 7. Its is relevant to mention here that while deciding Appeals No. 128 of 1998,135 of 1998 and 136 of 1998, this Court vide its judgment dated 19.3.1998 has categorically upheld the finding of the learned Tribunal that the accident resulted on account of rash and negligent driving of the Bus by its Driver. Thus, the only question which remains to be determined in these appeals is whether the learned Tribunal has rightly adjudicated the quantum of compensation or not? 8. While deciding Claim Petition No. 203 of 1996, which pertains to Appeal No. 127 of 1998, the learned Tribunal has held that at the time of his death, the age of deceased-Nathu was about 23 years and he was earning Rs. 2,000/- per month. The deceased was pending Rs. 1,400/- per month on his dependents. Thus, the learned Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 2,00,000/- for loss of income, Rs. 10,000/- against consortium, Rs. 10,000/- to the minor children (non-applicants No. 2 to 6) for loss of love and affection and Rs. 2,000/- against funeral charges. In other words, the learned Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 2,22,000/- as compensation to the claimants-respondents of Appeal No. 127 of 1998. 9. Similarly while deciding Claim Petition No. 204 of 1996, which pertains to Appeal No. 129 of 1998, the learned Tribunal keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case awarded a lump sum amount of Rupees 1,00,000/- against loss of income, Rupees 10,000/- against consortium and Rs. 2,000/- to his minor children against loss of love and affection and Rs. 2,500/- against funeral charges. In other words, the learned Tribunal awarded a lump sum compensation of Rupees 1,14,500/- in favour of the claimants-respondents of Appeal No. 129 of 1998. 10. I have heard Mr. Sangeet Lodha, the learned counsel appearing for the appellant is each case and have very carefully gone sought the record of the case. 11. Mr. 2,500/- against funeral charges. In other words, the learned Tribunal awarded a lump sum compensation of Rupees 1,14,500/- in favour of the claimants-respondents of Appeal No. 129 of 1998. 10. I have heard Mr. Sangeet Lodha, the learned counsel appearing for the appellant is each case and have very carefully gone sought the record of the case. 11. Mr. Sangeet Lodha, the learned counsel appearing for the appellant has contended that the learned Tribunal has not applied the maximum multiplier and instead of that, it has granted a lump sum amount as compensation in favour of the claimants-respondents in each case and hence, the learned Tribunal has erred in awarding exorbitant Award in favour of the claimants. 12. I have considered the above contention. In my opinion, the compensation awarded to the claimants-respondents is not exorbitant and even keeping in view the dependency of the claimants and the age of the deceased in each case, and further the maximum multiplier which can be applied, the compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal cannot be said to be exorbitant and it comes almost to the same amount as determined by the learned Tribunal. 13. In this view of the matter, the learned Tribunal has not committed any illegality in awarding the above compensation in favour of the claimants-respondents. No ground exists for interference with the impugned Awards. 14. In the result, I find no force in these appeals and they are hereby dismissed summarily.Appeal dismissed. *******