Judgment S. K. KESHOTE, J. ( 1 ) -HEARD the learned counsel for the parties and perused the entire record of the miscellaneous appeal. ( 2 ) THIS appeal, under section 173 of the motor Vehicles Act, 1988, is directed by claimants-appellants against the award, dated 1. 6. 2001, of the learned Motor Accidents claims Tribunal, Hindaun City, in claim Case No. 38 of 1999. Under the impugned award learned Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 74,000 as compensation in favour of claimants-appellants for the death of Arun Kumar in motor accident which took place on 4. 2. 1999. ( 3 ) ARUN Kumar was the student of class i, he was aged 7 years. In the case of death of a child of the age of 8 years, this court in S. B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 36 of 2000 awarded a sum of Rs. 1,50,000 as compensation in favour of the claimants-appellants. ( 4 ) LEARNED counsel for the claimants-appellants, relying on the decision of the supreme Court in Manju Devi v. Musafir paswan, 2005 ACJ 99 (SC), submitted that in the case of death of a child the amount of compensation is to be awarded after taking his income at Rs. 15,000 per annum, as per the Second Schedule to the motor Vehicles Act, 1988, treating him as non-earning member. He further submitted that multiplier of 15 ought to have been adopted by the learned Tribunal as per the second Schedule to the Act aforesaid. ( 5 ) ON the other hand, learned counsel for the non-claimant-respondents supported the award of the learned Tribunal. ( 6 ) AFTER having given my anxious and thoughtful consideration to the rival contentions of learned counsel for the parties, i find sufficient merit and substance in the contention of the learned counsel for the claimants-appellants. ( 7 ) SECOND Schedule to the Act provides that for the assessment of compensation the multiplier of 15 should be taken in the case of death of a boy up to the age of 15 years. ( 8 ) IN Manju Devis case, 2005 ACJ 99 (SC), the Honble Supreme Court has not made any deduction towards personal expenses of the deceased. The deceased boy was aged 13 years and the multiplier of 15 has been adopted. ( 9 ) IN the result the appeal succeeds in part. ( 8 ) IN Manju Devis case, 2005 ACJ 99 (SC), the Honble Supreme Court has not made any deduction towards personal expenses of the deceased. The deceased boy was aged 13 years and the multiplier of 15 has been adopted. ( 9 ) IN the result the appeal succeeds in part. The impugned award of the learned tribunal is modified and it is declared that claimants-appellants are entitled for the amount of compensation under the head of loss of economic dependency taking the income of the deceased at Rs. 15,000 per annum and the multiplier of 15 shall be applicable. ( 10 ) IN this way, the amount of compensation under the head of loss of economic dependency comes to Rs. 2,25,000 (Rs. 15,000 x 15) and after deducting the amount of Rs. 42,000 therefrom being the compensation awarded by learned Claims tribunal under this head, the enhanced amount to be paid to claimants-appellants comes to Rs. 1,83,000 (Rs. 2,25,000 - Rs. 42,000 ). On this amount the claimants-appellants shall be entitled for interest at the rate of 9 per cent from the date of filing of the claim petition till its realisation. ( 11 ) THE non-claimant-respondent No. 2, the Rajasthan State Road Transport corporation, Jaipur, is directed to deposit the amount of enhanced compensation with interest thereon, as directed above, in this court within a period of one month from the date of receipt of the copy of this order, by way of account payee cheque/dd/pay order, drawn in the name of the registrar (Administration) of this court. ( 12 ) ON deposit of the amount aforesaid by the non-claimant-respondent No. 2 r. S. R. T. C. , the court shall pass the order of its investment/disbursement and the registry to place the matter for orders on board immediately after the amount is deposited as per aforesaid directions. Appeal allowed.