BHAWANI SINGH, C. J. ( 1 ) THIS appeal check-post, Ranjhi (Jabalpur) when truck arises out of award dated 9. 3. 1999 passed No. HYQ 9365 driven rashly and negli-by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, gently by Chandrabhan (driver) hit cycle jabalpur in M. V. C. No. 48 of 1997. of Munna Lal (deceased ). As a result of this accident, Munnal Lal (42) died. The ( 2 ) ACCIDENT took place on 14. 2. 1997 at truck was owned by respondent No. 1 and insured with respondent No. 2. Compensation of Rs. 9,98,000 has been claimed by the claimants (appellants) for the death of deceased Munna Lal who was husband and father of appellant Nos. 1 and 2 respectively. Driver died during pendency of proceedings, therefore, his name has been deleted from the case. Surviving respondents have stated that deceased was driving the cycle recklessly after taking liquor and fell down after being hit by other vehicles in the crowd. The truck was being driven carefully and cautiously and accident did not take place with the truck. A false case has been filed against driver of the truck, otherwise accident had taken place due to the fault of deceased. Chandrabhan (driver)did not possess valid driving licence, therefore, the respondents are not liable to pay compensation and claim be dismissed. ( 3 ) CLAIMS Tribunal framed five issues, recorded evidence and came to the conclusion that accident took place as alleged. Deceased died in this accident. The truck was insured with Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. The allegation that driver did not possess valid driving licence has remained unsubstantiated. Ultimately, joint and several liability to pay compensation has been fastened on the insurer and insured for rs. 1,84,800 carrying interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum. Claimants are not satisfied with this award. ( 4 ) MR. A. P. Singh, learned counsel for appellants contends that Claims Tribunal has faulted in assessing just compensation by wrong application of multiplier and in calculating the income of deceased. Precisely, submission is that the deceased was class IV employee earning Rs. 3,791 per month and the proper multiplier in this case should be 15 instead of 12 applied by claims Tribunal. Assuming that bonus and overtime do not form part of the income of deceased, still he was earning Rs. 2,851 per month. Precisely, submission is that the deceased was class IV employee earning Rs. 3,791 per month and the proper multiplier in this case should be 15 instead of 12 applied by claims Tribunal. Assuming that bonus and overtime do not form part of the income of deceased, still he was earning Rs. 2,851 per month. ( 5 ) GIVING our consideration to the matter, it can be said that deceased was earning rs. 2,851 per month. After deduction of Rs. 1,263 towards personal expenditure, monthly dependency comes to Rs. 1,588 and annual Rs. 19,056. Proper multiplier in this case is 15. This way, compensation figure comes to Rs. 2,85,840. In addition, appellants (claimants) shall be entitled to compensation of Rs. 19,500 (Rs. 5,000 towards loss of consortium, Rs. 10,000 for loss of expectancy of life, Rs. 2,500 for loss to the estate and Rs. 2,000 for funeral expenses) taking the total amount of compensation to Rs. 3,05,240. The enhanced compensation will carry interest at the rate of 9 per cent (nine per cent) per annum. ( 6 ) APPEAL is disposed of in the terms aforesaid, leaving the parties to bear their own costs. Appeal allowed. .