SAPRE, J. ( 1 ) THIS is an appeal filed by the claimants who are legal representatives of the deceased under section 173 of the motor Vehicles Act against an award dated 13. 5. 2004, passed by learned Member, motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Dewas in Claim Case No. 39 of 2003. By the impugned award, the Tribunal has awarded a total sum of Rs. 2,90,000 with interest to the claimants for the death of one Mukesh, who died in vehicular accident. According to claimants, the compensation awarded is on a lower side and hence, it needs to be enhanced. It is for claiming enhancement in compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the claimants have come up in appeal. So the question that arises for consideration is, whether any case for enhancement in compensation awarded by the Tribunal on facts/evidence is made out in the compensation awarded and if so, to what extent? ( 2 ) HEARD Mr. M. Manav, learned counsel for the appellants and Mr. H. C. Jindal, learned counsel for insurance company, respondent No. 3. ( 3 ) IT is not necessary to narrate the entire facts in detail such as how the accident occurred, who was negligent in driving the offending vehicle, who is liable for paying compensation, etc. It is for the reason that, firstly, all these findings are recorded in favour of claimants by Tribunal. Secondly, none of these findings though recorded in claimants' favour are under challenge at the instance of any of the respondents such as, owner/driver or insurance company either by way of cross-appeal or cross-objection. In this view of the matter, we do not wish to burden our judgment by detailing facts on all these issues. ( 4 ) AS observed supra, it is a death case. On 14. 1. 2003, Mukesh, aged around 25 years, a cobbler by profession, met with a motor accident and died, giving rise to filing of claim petition by his legal representatives (appellants herein) out of which this appeal arises seeking compensation for his death. The case was contested by the respondents. Parties adduced evidence. The Claims Tribunal by impugned award partly allowed the claim petition filed by claimants and as stated supra, awarded a sum of Rs. 2,90,000 to the claimants. It was held that deceased's monthly income was Rs. 3,000 from his business. The case was contested by the respondents. Parties adduced evidence. The Claims Tribunal by impugned award partly allowed the claim petition filed by claimants and as stated supra, awarded a sum of Rs. 2,90,000 to the claimants. It was held that deceased's monthly income was Rs. 3,000 from his business. Applying the multiplier of 12 and deducting 1/3rd from this income for his personal expenses, the Claims Tribunal awarded Rs. 2,88,000 to the claimants by way of compensation. In addition, a sum of Rs. 2,000 was further awarded for conventional heads thereby making a total of Rs. 2,90,000. It is against this determination, the claimants have filed this appeal contending, inter alia, that the compensation awarded to the claimants is on a lower side and hence, deserves to be enhanced. ( 5 ) WE have gone through the evidence adduced by the claimants on the question of deceased's income and other relevant issues with a view to find out whether we can interfere in some findings for enhancing the compensation. Having perused the evidence, we are of the view that Tribunal is right in its approach so far as income of deceased is concerned. In other words, the finding recorded by the Tribunal on the issue of income is based on proper appreciation of evidence led by claimants and hence, it does not call for any interference. We, therefore, concur with the finding and uphold the same. ( 6 ) THE only area where we wish to interfere is that of applicability of multiplier. In our view, looking to the age of deceased (25 years), Claims Tribunal should have applied the multiplier of 18 in place of 12 as provided in Schedule appended to the act. We, therefore, interfere on this issue for redetermining the compensation by applying the multiplier of 18. Similarly, we are inclined to interfere in the compensation awarded by the Tribunal under conventional heads. In fact what we notice is that Tribunal failed to award any compensation under any of the statutory heads except funeral expenses. We, therefore, award a sum of Rs. 25,000 in lump sum to the claimants under conventional heads, such as funeral expenses, loss of love and affection, consortium and estate, etc. In our view, looking to the family, etc. , of deceased, a sum of Rs. 25,000 is just and reasonable. We, therefore, award a sum of Rs. 25,000 in lump sum to the claimants under conventional heads, such as funeral expenses, loss of love and affection, consortium and estate, etc. In our view, looking to the family, etc. , of deceased, a sum of Rs. 25,000 is just and reasonable. ( 7 ) ACCORDINGLY and in view of foregoing discussion, the claimants are held entitled to claim a total sum of Rs. 2,000 x 12 = Rs. 24,000 x 18 = Rs. 4,32,000 + rs. 25,000 = Rs. 4,57,000. ( 8 ) IN other words, claimants are held entitled for a total sum of Rs. 4,57,000 by way of compensation for the death of mukesh. ( 9 ) THE compensation awarded to the claimants is just, reasonable and proper looking to the facts and circumstances of the case and taking into account the law laid down by the Supreme Court in these types of cases. Indeed in such cases, no fixed and any static formula is provided for determining the compensation and the same is required to be determined on the basis of evidence adduced and the relevant factors mentioned supra. It is on this basis, the courts have to work out award of reasonable compensation. ( 10 ) LEARNED counsel for the appellants cited some authorities for claiming enhancement. We have gone through these authorities. In our opinion and as observed supra, every case depends upon facts of each case and one cannot rely upon the cases for awarding compensation. ( 11 ) IN this view of the matter, the appeal succeeds and is allowed in part. Impugned award is modified to the extent indicated above. The enhanced sum will carry interest at the rate of 6 per cent per annum from the date of application till realization. All other findings are upheld being not under challenge. Counsel's fees Rs. 1,500, if certified. .