USHA SHUKLA, J. ( 1 ) THIS is the claimant's appeal for enhancement of compensation awarded by the Second Motor Accidents claims Tribunal, Murwara (Katni) on account of death of her son Sunder Raj pillai in an automobile accident. ( 2 ) THE appellant is the mother of the deceased who was 37 years old at the time of the accident. He was an employee of the Indian Railways and as per the salary certificate Exh. P-l, was earning a salary of Rs. 1,857 per month as Electric Fitter grade IX. On the fateful day he was hit by truck No. PAT 5357 driven by respondent No. 1, owned by respondent No. 2 and insured with respondent No. 3, Sunder raj Pillai died on the spot as a result of the injuries sustained in this accident. The driver was apprehended on the spot. ( 3 ) THE Tribunal held that the accident occurred on account of the rash and negligent driving of this truck and considering the age of the deceased and that of the claimant a multiplier of 13 was taken. The annual dependency was assessed at rs. 15,084 after deducting Rs. 600 from his salary of Rs. 1,857 per month, towards personal living expenses. The dependency of LRs was thus arrived at Rs. 1,96,092. To this an amount of Rs. 2,000 was added towards funeral expenses. The Tribunal thus awarded a total sum of Rs. 1,98,092 as compensation from which a sum of rs. 27,392 which had already been paid by way of interim compensation was deducted. The balance of Rs. 1,70,700 was directed to be paid within two months of the award with interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum. ( 4 ) IT was argued on behalf of the claimant that future prospects of the deceased were not taken into consideration and proper multiplier was not chosen. It was further contended that compensation awarded for funeral expenses was also inadequate. ( 5 ) WE have carefully considered the arguments advanced by the appellant and have perused the record of the case. The leading case on determination of compensation is General Manager, Kerala State road Trans. Corpn. v. Susamma Thomas, 1994 ACJ 1 (SC), it has approved multiplier method. Loss of dependency has first to be ascertained and the multiplicand is to be capitalised by choosing the appropriate multiplier. The leading case on determination of compensation is General Manager, Kerala State road Trans. Corpn. v. Susamma Thomas, 1994 ACJ 1 (SC), it has approved multiplier method. Loss of dependency has first to be ascertained and the multiplicand is to be capitalised by choosing the appropriate multiplier. In choosing the multiplier the age of the deceased and that of the claimants is to be kept in mind and calculation has to be made as to what capital sums, if invested, would yield the multiplicand by way of annual interest. In calculating the dependency future prospects of the deceased have also to be considered. ( 6 ) THE deceased in this case was an employee of the Indian Railways. His salary at the time of his death was Rs. 1,857. But he would have earned promotions and increments in due course. Grades are also revised from time to time. His monthly income can, therefore, be taken to be rs. 2,500. ( 7 ) THE deceased was an unmarried young man of 37 years of age. He had an aged mother and two unmarried sisters to support. His personal living expenses may be taken to be Rs. 1,000 per month. The dependency of his heirs thus comes to rs. 1,500 per month or Rs. 18,000 per annum. In the circumstances of this case a multiplier of 12 would be appropriate. The compensation would work out to rs. 18,000 x 12 = Rs. 2,16,000. To this rs. 2,000 is added as funeral expenses and rs. 2,500 towards loss to estate. The total compensation thus comes to Rs. 2,20,500. This, in our opinion, would be just compensation. The appellant would, therefore, be entitled to get a sum of Rs. 2,21,000 with interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum, from the date of application till realisation. ( 8 ) THE insurance company, respondent no. 3 is directed to deposit the amount less the amount already deposited within a period of two months from the date of supply of certified copy of this order failing which the amount shall carry interest at the rate of 15 per cent per annum. On deposit the amount shall be disbursed to the appellant keeping in mind the well settled guidelines by the Supreme Court. ( 9 ) IN the result, the appeal is allowed with costs. On deposit the amount shall be disbursed to the appellant keeping in mind the well settled guidelines by the Supreme Court. ( 9 ) IN the result, the appeal is allowed with costs. The award of the Tribunal shall be substituted as indicated hereinabove. Counsel's fee Rs. 1,000, if pre-certified. Appeal allowed.