Judgment ( 1. ) THE appellant/claimant has filed the appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 for the enhancement of the amount of Award dated 22-9-1995 in Claim Case No. 406/1987 passed by the learned First Member of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Mhow, District Indore, wherein the amount of Rs. 75,000. 00 was awarded as compensation to the appellant with interest @ 12% p. a. from 8- 4-1993. ( 2. ) IT is not in dispute that the son of the appellant has died on account of the accident caused on 2-4-1987 by Truck No. DYL-727 and the truck was insured by respondent No. 3 - New India Assurance Company. ( 3. ) THE case of the appellant is that on 2-4-1987 at about 8. 30 P. M. when the son of the appellant Radheshyam was going to supply the food, near the railway crossing at Simrol Road, Truck No. DYL-727, driven rashly and negligently by respondent No. 2 - Ram Kumar, struck him and Radheshyam succumbed to the injuries on the spot. That the age of Radheshyam was about 27 years and he was earning Rs. 100. 00 per day by doing the work of motor mechanic. The appellant has prayed for the amount of one lac, jointly and severally, from the respondents. ( 4. ) RESPONDENT Nos. 1 and 2 remained ex parte and respondent No. 3 - Insurance Company has denied the fact that deceased Radheshyam was earning Rs. 100. 00 per day and it is also pleaded that the Insurance Company is not liable to pay the amount of compensation on account of the fact that the driver was driving the truck without having the valid licence. ( 5. ) THE learned Tribunal has held that the truck was driven rashly and negligently by the driver who was having a valid licence and that the appellants are entitled for the compensation on the yearly loss of dependency of Rs. 5,000. 00 and the multiplier of 12. ( 6. ) THE appellant has assailed the award on the ground that it is inadequate and the learned Tribunal has not applied the proper multiplier and erred in holding that the dependency of Rs. 5000. 00 per annum and as such the amount of the award be enhanced. ( 7. ) THE age of the father of the deceased is about 68 years. 5000. 00 per annum and as such the amount of the award be enhanced. ( 7. ) THE age of the father of the deceased is about 68 years. The mother of the deceased has expired after filing of the claim petition. The deceased was unmarried and the age of the deceased is mentioned as 27 years in the post-mortem report (Ex. P-1 ). Looking to the advance age of the appellant of about 68 years, the learned Tribunal has applied the multiplier of 12. In view of the fact that the deceased was only aged 27 years and at the time of the accident the age of the appellant was only about 55 years, the multiplier applied by the Tribunal is on lower side and is enhanced to 14. ( 8. ) THE appellant has not led any evidence to prove that per day income of his son was Rs. 100. 00. The appellant has also not shown that with whom and where the deceased was working as a motor mechanic. No evidence exists to show the qualification of the deceased. Consequently the learned Tribunal has rightly assessed that in the year 1987 the monthly income of the deceased should be round about Rs. 600. 00 per month. The dependency is rightly calculated to the extent of Rs. 5,000. 00 per annum. In the aforesaid circumstances, the appellant is entitled for Rs. 10,000. 00 more in addition to the compensation of Rs. 75,000. 00 provided to him. The accident has taken place more than 17 years back and calculating the rate of interest, the appellant who is aged about 68 years, will get the amount of about one lac rupees which will not be inadequate. The learned Tribunal has awarded the amount of Rs. 15,000. 00 for the loss of love and affection and the expenses of cremation which needs no interference. ( 9. ) CONSEQUENTLY, the appeal is partly allowed and the amount of compensation is enhanced from Rs. 75,000. 00 to Rs. 85,000. 00. The appellant will be entitled for the interest on the award from 8-4-1993. The Counsels fee is fixed as Rs. 500. 00.