BHAWANI SINGH, J. ( 1 ) THROUGH this appeal the award of the Motor Accidents claims Tribunal, Katni, in Claim Case No. 62 of 1989, dated 27. 3. 1996 has been challenged. ( 2 ) BRIEFLY stated, the accident took place on 9. 5. 1989 when truck No. CPQ 6301, being driven rashly and negligently, dashed against a Fiat car No. MWZ 176. As a result of this head-on collision, deceased occupant of Fiat car died. The Claims Tribunal holds that the accident took place due to rash and negligent driving of the truck by its driver and there was no negligence by the driver of the Fiat car. At the time of accident, deceased was earning rs. 3,000 per month. Against the claim of rs. 3,000 per month as income, the Claims tribunal holds that the deceased may be earning Rs. 1,500 per month and after deducting 1/3rd towards personal expenditure, yearly dependency has been fixed at rs. 10,000. Consequently, after applying multiplier of 16, compensation amount of rs. 2,50,400, carrying interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum has been awarded. Claimants are not satisfied with this award, therefore, it has been challenged through this appeal. ( 3 ) HEARD learned counsel for parties and perused the record. ( 4 ) MR. Ashok Lalwani, learned counsel for appellants urges that the Claims Tribunal has not awarded just compensation in this case. Deceased was 22 years old at the time of accident; he had passed B. E. (Mech.) from Regional Engineering College, Surat; therefore, he had every chance of getting into good service and earn handsome income. Immediately after completing studies, he was attending A. C. repair work and was hopeful of coming up very well in life. Consequently, deceased had great potential to be an engineer and earn promotion. ( 5 ) MR. S. K. Rao, learned counsel for new India Assurance Co. Ltd. submits that the Claims Tribunal has assessed the income of the deceased quite reasonably looking to the fact that at the time of accident, he was unemployed and could, therefore, earn to the extent settled by Claims tribunal. With this background, enhancement is not justified. Mr. Suresh Raj, the learned counsel for United India Insurance co. Ltd. submits that the Claims Tribunal has assessed the income of the deceased quite reasonably looking to the fact that at the time of accident, he was unemployed and could, therefore, earn to the extent settled by Claims tribunal. With this background, enhancement is not justified. Mr. Suresh Raj, the learned counsel for United India Insurance co. Ltd. submits that the Fiat car insured with it was not at fault, it did not cause the accident as held by the Tribunal and, therefore, it could not be made liable to pay the compensation. ( 6 ) GIVING consideration to the whole matter, we are of the opinion that Claims tribunal has not awarded just compensation in this case. Undisputedly, deceased had obtained his B. E. (Mech.) degree from regional Engineering College, Surat, in july, 1988. Unfortunately, at the young age of 22, life has been snatched away when the offending vehicle hit the Fiat car near katni resulting in his death. Deceased had potential to join government service or do private business and earn handsomely. The question is whether the Tribunal has assessed the compensation properly and whether it calls for interference. ( 7 ) CLAIMANTS have stated in the claim petition that deceased could earn Rs. 2,500 per month by joining Government service, otherwise, he was earning Rs. 3,000 per month. Therefore, assessment of compensation made by the Claims Tribunal is not accepted; rather taking into consideration the fact that the deceased was earning rs. 3,000 per month at the time of accident, it would be safer to accept this compensation, since it is not easy to get into government service. Therefore, taking into consideration Rs. 3,000 per month as the income of deceased and deducting 1/3rd towards personal expenditure, the annual dependency comes to Rs. 24,000. He was 22 years old at the time of accident; therefore, the appropriate multiplier applicable would be 17. Accordingly, compensation works out to Rs. 4,08,000 + Rs. 7,000 for loss of expectancy of life, Rs. 2,500 for loss to the estate and Rs. 2,000 for funeral expenses, total = Rs. 4,19,500. ( 8 ) ACCORDINGLY, the appeal is allowed and award of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal is modified. Claimants are awarded compensation of Rs. 4,19,500. The enhanced compensation will carry interest at the rate of 9 per cent per annum from the date of application till payment. Costs on parties. Appeal allowed. 2,000 for funeral expenses, total = Rs. 4,19,500. ( 8 ) ACCORDINGLY, the appeal is allowed and award of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal is modified. Claimants are awarded compensation of Rs. 4,19,500. The enhanced compensation will carry interest at the rate of 9 per cent per annum from the date of application till payment. Costs on parties. Appeal allowed. .