JUDGMENT Deceased Khemraj was having his own agricultural land admeasuring 1.07 hectares in village Machaliya, wherein, he was carrying on his agricultural operation. Apart from the above, it was further averred that he was also carrying on work of Meson, but, this has not been found to be proved. Deceased Khemraj was having a large family to be looked after, that is two wives, 9 children and mother. On the strength of oral evidence adduced by claimants, the monthly income of deceased was assessed at Rs. 5,000/-. After usual deduction of 1/3rd that deceased must have been spending himself, the dependency has been worked out at Rs. 3,500/- per month, to which, looking to the age of deceased and that of the claimants, multiplier of 16 has been adopted. Thus, in our considered opinion, the amount of compensation awarded to the claimants, cannot be said to be excessive or exorbitant. The amount has been awarded only after considering the evidence that was adduced by the claimants. No case for interference is made out. The appeal being devoid of any merits and substance, is, hereby dismissed. Consequently the application for stay is also hereby rejected. No order as to costs.