JUDGMENT 1. - This misc. appeal has been preferred by the claimants against the order of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, in case No. 25/96. The appellants are the widow, sons and mother of deceased of Swaroop Narain Pareek. The deceased Swaroop Narain Pareek had died on 28.3.1995 when the car in which he was travelling along with other persons had met an accident with a trolla No. RJ 01 G-1635, causing the death of Smt. Premlata Khandelwal, wife of Shri Sitaram, Rajaram Khandelwal S/o Sitaram and the present deceased involved in the present appeal Swaroop Narain. The trolla was insured by the Oriental Insurance Company, respondent No. 3. The deceased was aged 50 years and was working as Assistant in the secretariat FIR was recorded in the Police Station Kishangarh District Ajmer being FIR No. 79/95. The owner and the driver of the trolla were proceeded ex parte. 2. On the evidence produced by the claimants of the witnesses Krishna Kumar PW-1, Smt. Alka Khandelwal PW-2, Medhawati PW-3, Ram Narain Gurjar PW-4, and Rishikesh PW-5 and relying on as many as documents, the Tribunal had reached the conclusion that Trolla RJ 01-G-1635 coming from Kishangarh had struck the Ambassador car No. RSB 5787 negligently and rashly. The Tribunal had believed the independent eye-witness who belonged to the nearby village where the accident had occurred. 3. The objection raised by the insurance company in issue No. 3 were not pressed by the insurer. 4. For determining the compensation it was the contention of the appellants that the deceased was still to work till the age of superannuation upto 58 years of age and he would have earned salary. There were chances of his promotion in the secretariat and taking the life span of 70 years, the appellant had claimed Rs. 39,11,000/- but the Tribunal had granted Rs. 10,62,500/- with interest 12% p.a. from the date of application till the realisation of payment. The Tribunal had apportioned the amount by awarding Rs. 50,000/- to the mother who was 83 years of age and Rs. 4,00,000/- each to the sons and remaining amount was to be paid to the widow of the deceased. The Tribunal had found that the age of deceased was 50 years and as per the salary slip Ex. P 5 his monthly salary was Rs. 50,000/- to the mother who was 83 years of age and Rs. 4,00,000/- each to the sons and remaining amount was to be paid to the widow of the deceased. The Tribunal had found that the age of deceased was 50 years and as per the salary slip Ex. P 5 his monthly salary was Rs. 5978/- on the date of accident and that he was to serve another 10 years and after taking into account the future promotion, the Tribunal had assessed the average salary to be Rs. 9,000/- p.m. After dividing the family members into 10 units, as per the law laid down in the case of U.P. Road Transport Corporation and others v. Trilok Chandra and others (1996) 4 SCC 362 and after deducting the amount of Rs. 2250/-, the dependency was assessed at Rs. 6,750/- with a multiplier of 13 and the total amount had been assessed at Rs. 10,53,00/-. In addition to above the loss of consortium was assessed as Rs. 5,000/, cremation expenses as Rs. 2,000/- and for the loss of estate as Rs. 2,500/-and by adding the said total of Rs. 9,500/-, the total compensation was awarded to Rs. 10,62,500/- and after deducting the amount .of Rs. 50,000/ which was paid on account of no fault liability, the insurance company was directed to pay the remaining amount. This appeal has been filed for enhancement. 5. The contention of the counsel for the appellant is that immediately after the accident, the fifth pay commission report was made applicable from to 1.1.1996 and in that situation the salary of the deceased would have raised to Rs. 11,243/- and, therefore, there was no basis for the Tribunal to fix the monthly average salary Rs. 9,000/-. The counsel has also challenged the application of multiplier of 13, the amount of Rs. 5,000/- as loss of consortium is challenged as to be very meagre. In addition to above the loss of love and affection for the children and mother has not been cared about by the Tribunal. 6. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the appellant that in no circumstance the average salary could have been fixed less than Rs. 11,000/- taking into report of the 5th Pay Commission, date of increment and other allowances as payable. 6. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the appellant that in no circumstance the average salary could have been fixed less than Rs. 11,000/- taking into report of the 5th Pay Commission, date of increment and other allowances as payable. It is submitted that AW-5, the Accountant of the Rajasthan Secretariat, had appeared as witness who had brought the salary record and the calculation. AW-5 had stated that as per record, the date of birth of the deceased was 20.4.1945. He had produced the salary account. AW-5 had stated that the notification showing the increase in dearness allowance from the back date was issued on 21.3.1998 and the pay of the deceased was increased in the year 1995 itself from Rs. 5,978/- to Rs. 6,248/-. Subsequent to that, 5th Pay Commission Report was made applicable from 1.9.996. Increment was due in the month of September 1995. The pay would have jumped from 1.9.1996 to Rs. 7,700/- on 17.9.1996 and Rs. 7,900/- in the next year plus usual allowances. He has further stated that in the year 1998 the total salary of the deceased would have been Rs. 11,243/- which included the basic pay, HRA, CCA, Special Pay, Dearness Allowances etc. Even though at the time when the statement was made, the retirement age was 60 years, but lateron it was reduced to 58 years and, therefore, the deceased would have retired in the year 2003. If the deceased would have got Rs. 11,243/- in the month of September 1998 and by adding an increment and increased allowances of Rs. 200/- every year, he would have got an amount of Rs. 12,243/- in the year 2003 as his pay. Right from 1998 to 2003 for six years, the deceased would have got raise in pay by adding of Rs. 1200/- as increments Rs. 200/- in each year even by excluding DA etc. on increments. The deceased would have got in the year 1998 total pay Rs. 11,243 x 12 - Rs. 1,34,916/-, in the year 1999 Rs. 11,443x12 = Rs. 1,37,316/-, upto 2000 and similarly in the year 2001, 2002 and 2003, the monthly salary would have been Rs. 11,643/-, 11,843/- and 12,043/- respectively after adding the as increments. The average monthly pay for the six years from 1998 to 2003 shall come to Rs. 11,743/- per month. 1,34,916/-, in the year 1999 Rs. 11,443x12 = Rs. 1,37,316/-, upto 2000 and similarly in the year 2001, 2002 and 2003, the monthly salary would have been Rs. 11,643/-, 11,843/- and 12,043/- respectively after adding the as increments. The average monthly pay for the six years from 1998 to 2003 shall come to Rs. 11,743/- per month. The basic pay in the years 1996 and 1977 was Rs. 7700/- per month and Rs. 7900/- per month and after adding the D.A. etc. roughly Rs. 1100/- as per the notification of 1998 the salary including the D.A. would have been Rs. 8700/- for 1996 and Rs. 8900/- for 1997 and the average monthly salary for the year 1996 and 1997 would have been Rs. 8,800/- for the said two years. By taking into account the increase in the salary in the eight years as per the notification of the Fifth Pay Commission, it was made applicable the monthly average salary comes to Rs. 11,000/- including all the allowances and, therefore, the rough estimate by the Tribunal to fix the salary after the Fifth Pay Commission to be Rs. 9,000/- has no basis. The calculation has been got made by the counsel from various notifications as prevailing at that rate, and as such the average salary coming to Rs. 11,000/- and considering the deceased to be having two units out of 10 units as has been held by the Tribunal, a sum of Rs. 2200/- is to be deducted. If another amount of Rs. 800/- is also deducted for other misc. expenses of the deceased, the total amount in spent on deceased himself comes at Rs. 3,000/- and the average monthly dependency shall be fixed at Rs. 8,000/- (Rs. 11,000-3000=8000). Even if chances of promotion in the secretariat are not taken into account, but still the dependency loss by applying the multiplier of 13 as has been held by the Tribunal which is not challenged by the respondent's case to Rs. 12,48,000/-. 7. There is merit in the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that consortium amount of Rs. 5,000/- is very meagre. The consortium amount is raised to Rs. 25,000/-. The Tribunal has not awarded any amount for loss of love and affection of the father to the sons and the old mother. 12,48,000/-. 7. There is merit in the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that consortium amount of Rs. 5,000/- is very meagre. The consortium amount is raised to Rs. 25,000/-. The Tribunal has not awarded any amount for loss of love and affection of the father to the sons and the old mother. Even though love, affection and the sufferings and pains cannot be measured in the terms of money, but in my opinion, the minimum Rs. 10,000/- for each of the other claimants, should have been given by the Tribunal. The Tribunal had also erred in granting only Rs. 2,000/- for cremation expenses. It is admitted fact that the dead-body was to be brought from outside which itself could have been not less than Rs. 2000/- to Rs. 3000/. The cremation expenses are raised to Rs. 5500/- plus loss to the estate which is maintained as given by the Tribunal. Thus, the total compensation would come to Rs. 13,11,000/- which shall be the just amount to meet the justice, in the present case, without taking the promotional chances of deceased. 8. For the reasons mentioned above, the appeal is partly accepted. The total amount of compensation is raised to Rs. 13,11,000/- with the same rate of interest as awarded by the Tribunal and apportionment as awarded by the Tribunal. The respondent insurance company is directed to pay the payment within three months after making adjustment of the amount already paid. 9. The Misc. appeal is partly allowed. No order as to costs.Appeal partly allowed. *******