Judgment ( 1. ) CLAIMANTS are not satisfied with the award of Rs. 50,000/-, passed in their favour by the Tribunal. It is dated 5-2-2000, passed in Claim Case No. 147 of 1999 by learned Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Dewas. They want more and hence, they have filed this appeal under Section 173 of the Motor vehicles Act against the aforementioned impugned award. So the short question that arises for consideration in this appeal is, whether any case for enhancement in the impugned award, i. e. , for Rs. 50,000/-, passed in claimants favour is made out on facts found and brought on record. ( 2. ) NONE for the appellants. Heard Shri A. Goyal, learned Counsel for respondent No. 3. ( 3. ) FACTS are not in dispute. On 31-7-1997, Durga Prasad, aged 35 years met with an accident when he was sitting in one tractor-trolley belonging to N. A. No. 2 (respondent No. 2) bearing No. MP-13-KA-2662-2663. This tractor-trolley was owned driven by N. A. No. 1 (respondent No. 1) and as stated supra owned by N. A. No. 2 (respondent No. 3 ). It is also the case of claimants who are the legal representative of Durga Prasad that he (Durga prasad) was in the employment of N. A. No. 2 (respondent No. 2 ). It is also alleged that tractor-trolley in question was insured with the N. A. No. 3 (respondent No. 3) at the relevant time. Due to accident, Durga Prasad died giving rise to filing of the claim petition by the claimants, out of which this appeal arises, claiming compensation for the death of Durga Prasad. So far as n. A. No. 1 and N. A. No. 2 are concerned they did not contest the claim and remained ex parte. Whereas Insurance Company (N. A. No. 3) alone contested. Claimants led evidence, i. e. , wife of claimant (P. W. 1 ). In the opinion of tribunal, the claimants were held entitled to claim a sum of Rs. 50,000/ -. It is against this award or we may say determination, the claimants have come up in appeal. ( 4. ) IN our opinion, the claimants are entitled for some enhancement in the compensation than what has been awarded to them. It is for the reason that firstly there is no rebuttal evidence led by the respondents (N. A. s ). It is against this award or we may say determination, the claimants have come up in appeal. ( 4. ) IN our opinion, the claimants are entitled for some enhancement in the compensation than what has been awarded to them. It is for the reason that firstly there is no rebuttal evidence led by the respondents (N. A. s ). Secondly, there is nothing to disbelieve the statement of claimant who is the wife of deceased. Thirdly, taking into account the age of deceased - 35 years, his monthly income (though we do not accept the figure in toto for want of more evidence), and the fact that he was working for respondent No. 2, the claimants can be awarded more compensation than what is actually awarded to the claimants by the Tribunal on the principle of no fault liability. ( 5. ) WE hold the company to be liable to indemnify the loss on the strength of policy in question. In our opinion, the fact that deceased was in the employment of respondent No. 2 - owner of offending vehicle and met with an accident while on duty, the liability of Insurance Company can not be avoided. We believe the evidence of deceased widow (P. W. 1) on this issue and hold the company liable to suffer the award. ( 6. ) WE are inclined to hold that deceased yearly income should be taken as Rs. 15,000/ -. After deducting l/3rd, we get the figure of Rs. 10,000/-as yearly dependency. We think it proper to apply the multiplier of 16 looking to the age of deceased. So the amount of compensation works out to Rs. 10,000/-x 16 = Rs. 1,60,000/ -. This enhanced amount to carry interest at the rate of 6% from the date of application till realization. In our opinion, the award of compensation would be just and reasonable in the facts and circumstances of the case and the evidence brought on record. ( 7. ) IN view of aforesaid discussion, the appeal succeeds and is allowed in part. Impugned award is modified to the extent indicated supra. No costs. Misc. Appeal allowed.