JUDGMENT 1. - The claimants-appellants have filed this appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act against the judgment/award dated 18.10.1995 of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jaipur District, Jaipur. 2. The brief facts are that one Birdhi Ram @ Birdhi Chand died in an accident on 10.1.1991 caused by rash and negligent driving of a truck RJI 6131. The learned Tribunal by judgment dated 18.10.1995 passed an award of Rs. 2,14,800/- in favour of the claimants-appellants. Aggrieved by this judgment/award the claimants-appellants have filed this appeal. 3. Shri R. Chandel for Shri P.C. Bhandari learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that looking to the age of the deceased a multiplier of 18 should have been adopted whereas the Tribunal has adopted a multiplier of 11 only. He has, therefore, prayed for enhancement of the compensation amount. 4. Shri Vinod Tyagi learned counsel for the respondent has supported the judgment/award of the learned Tribunal. 5. In Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Ltd. v. S. Rajapraiya and two Others, 2005 (1) WLC (SC) Civil 732 the Hon'ble Supreme Court without taking future prospects into consideration adopted a multiplier of 12 reducing it from 16 in the case where the deceased was about 38 years of age. In this case the deceased was about 30, years old at the time of the accident. As per the last pay certificate Ex. 7 excluding HRA the monthly salary of the deceased Birdhi Ram was as under: Basic Pay Rs. 1,010/- D.A. Rs. 434/- CCA Total Rs.35/- _________ Rs. 1,479/- _________ Thus the total monthly salary of the deceased was Rs. 1,479/- whereas the learned Tribunal after taking future prospects into consideration has assessed the average income as Rs. 2,100/- per month and thereafter it has adopted a multiplier of 11. I am of the view that in the facts and circumstances of the case the amount awarded as' compensation to the claimants appellants is just and fair and there is no reason to take a different view in the matter. 6. There is thus no ground for interference. 7. Consequently, the appeal fails Which is dismissed accordingly.Appeal dismissed. *******