JUDGMENT A. S. NAIDU, J. : M.A.C.A. No. 806/2005 has been filed by the United India Insurance Co. Ltd. under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act assailing the award dtd. 31st March, 2005 passed by the Second Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Cuttack in Misc. Case No. 8/2003. The same judgment is also assailed by the claimants as appellants in M.A.C.A. No. 758/2005. 2. The facts and points of law involved in both these cases being same, with consent of learned counsel for the par¬ties, the same were heard together. 3. The scenario of facts reveals that on 31st December, 2002 one Laxmidhar Nayak was standing near Jankia Police Station in the district of Khurda on the left side of the road. At that juncture, a truck bearing Regn. No. OR-07-D-9691 driven in a rash and negligent manner came in a high speed and knocked him down. Consequently, he sustained serious injuries on the head and other parts of his body. He was moved to Khurda Hospital and then to Capital Hospital before he succumbed to the injuries. It is stated that the deceased was aged about 38 years and was working as a Farash in G.A. Department, Government of Orissa. It is further alleged that a sum of Rs. 30,000/- was spent towards his treatment. His widow, minor son and old parents filed a petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act claiming compensa¬tion. 4. After receiving notice the owner of the offending Truck appeared and filed his written statement denying all the averments made in the claim petition except admitting the ownership further taking the stand that the Truck was duly in¬sured. 5. The Insurance Company in its written statement vaguely denied all the averments and called upon the petitioner-appellants to strict proof of their case by adducing substantial evidence. Validity of insurance policy and driving licence of the driver of the offending truck was also disputed. 6. The Tribunal on the basis of the pleadings framed as many as four issues. In order to substantiate their case the petitioner-appellants got three witnesses examined and exhibited nine documents. The Insurance Company got examined only one witness and exhibited a letter of the R.T.O., Ganjam as Ext. 6. The Tribunal on the basis of the pleadings framed as many as four issues. In order to substantiate their case the petitioner-appellants got three witnesses examined and exhibited nine documents. The Insurance Company got examined only one witness and exhibited a letter of the R.T.O., Ganjam as Ext. A. The Tribunal after discussing the evidence in extenso and relying upon the F.I.R. and other materials came to the conclusion that the death of Laxmidhar Nayak was caused due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle. The Tribunal arrived at the conclusion that the driver had a valid driving licence and the offending vehicle was duly insured. Taking into consideration his gross salary to be Rs. 4,408/- and his age to be 40 years, the Tribunal, awarded a compensation of Rs. 4,61,000/- with interest thereon @ 9% per annum from 25.2.2004 till realization. 7. The said award is assailed by the petitioner-appellants in M.A.C.A. No. 758/2005 mainly on the ground that the Tribunal acted illegally and with material irregularity in not taking the amount spent for medical treatment into consideration and that the Tribunal committed an error in applying a lower multiplier inasmuch as after determining the age of the deceased to be 40 years, the correct multiplier ought to have been “15” instead of “13”. According to the petitioner-appellants the amount awarded should be enhanced suitably. 8. The Insurance Company, on the other hand, assailed the award mainly on the ground that the driver of the offending vehicle was not possessing a valid driving licence and that the Tribunal acted illegally and with material irregularity in as¬sessing the compensation taking into consideration the gross salary, though law is well settled that the calculation should be made on the basis of the net salary of an employee and not the gross salary. According to learned counsel for the Insurance Company the Tribunal also committed an error in applying “13” multiplier and as such the amount awarded has been excessive and also the rate of interest awarded has been higher and it is a fit case where the award should be set aside. 9. I have heard learned counsel for the parties at length, perused the materials available and the evidence. The oral evidence coupled with Ext. 1 the F.I.R., Ext. 2 the charge sheet and Ext. 9. I have heard learned counsel for the parties at length, perused the materials available and the evidence. The oral evidence coupled with Ext. 1 the F.I.R., Ext. 2 the charge sheet and Ext. 3 the injury report, leads to an irresistible conclusion that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle. The evidence revealed that the vehicle was duly insured. Thus, the only question required to be considered, is as to whether the amount awarded is adequate or not. Law is well settled that the compensation should not be treated to be a bonanza, but that should always be just and proper. In the case at hand the Tribunal has committed an error very much apparent on the face of the judgment inasmuch as it has assessed the compensation taking into consideration the gross salary of the deceased. In the case of Lata Wadhwa and others v. State of Bihar and others reported in 2002 (1) TAC 138 (SC) it has been held that the compensations/damages should be assessed taking into consideration the net income of the deceased which was available for the support of himself and the dependants. Thus from the gross salary such part of income which an employee is accustomed to spend upon himself towards self-maintenance and pleasure has to be excluded. The salary certificate marked as Ext. 8 reveals that the gross salary of the deceased was Rs. 4,408/- per month, but then the amount drawn by the deceased (net payable) has been indicated to be Rs. 1,279/-. Though the salary certificate reveals both the net income and the take home salary of the deceased, the said fact was not kept in mind by the Tribu¬nal. So far as the application of multiplier is concerned, learned counsel for the petitioner-appellants in M.A.C.A. No. 758/2005 forcefully submitted that the age of the deceased being 40 years, the correct multiplier ought to have been “15” instead of “13”. 10. The submissions are strongly repudiated by learned counsel for the Insurance Company. So far as the application of multiplier is concerned, learned counsel for the petitioner-appellants in M.A.C.A. No. 758/2005 forcefully submitted that the age of the deceased being 40 years, the correct multiplier ought to have been “15” instead of “13”. 10. The submissions are strongly repudiated by learned counsel for the Insurance Company. Relying upon the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of New India Assurance Company Limited v. Smt. Kalpana and others reported in 2007 (1) TAC 795 (SC) learned counsel for the Insurance Company submitted that the multiplier method is adopted for ascertaining the loss of dependency and the schedule stipulated in the Motor Vehicles Act is only a ready reckoner and it cannot be treated as an iron tight jacket or gospel truth. According to learned counsel for the Insurance Company the Court should consider all the facts and circumstances and then apply the correct multiplier. 11. The multiplier method is applied for ascertaining the loss of dependency and the same depends upon the circumstances of each case. A correct multiplier is determined taking into consid¬eration the age of the deceased or that of the multiplicand whichever is higher. Thus the multiplier which should be applied may differ from case to case. It is clear that while awarding compensation the Court is required to keep in mind the amount which the deceased was contributing to the family on the date of his death and try to assess the capital amount vis-a-vis the interest thereon so as to protect the destitute family to stable the financial loss. The Court has to also keep in mind the fact that ultimately the capital amount awarded shall also be avail¬able to the dependants after a few years. 12. The Halsbury’s Laws of England in Vol. 34, para 98 stipulates as follows : “Assessment of damages under the Fatal Accidents Act, 1976, the Courts have evolved a method for calculating the amount of pecuniary benefit that dependants could reasonably expect to have received from the deceased in the future. First the annual value to the dependants of those benefits (the multiplicand) is assessed. In the ordinary case of the death of a wage-earner that figure is arrived at by deducting from the wages the estimated amount of his own personal and living expenses. The assessment is split into two parts. First the annual value to the dependants of those benefits (the multiplicand) is assessed. In the ordinary case of the death of a wage-earner that figure is arrived at by deducting from the wages the estimated amount of his own personal and living expenses. The assessment is split into two parts. The first part comprises damage for the period between death and trial. The multiplicand is multiplied by the number of years which have elapsed between those two dates. Interest at one-half the short-term investment rate is also awarded on that multiplicand. The second part is damages for the period from the trial onwards. For that period, the number of years which have based on the number of years that the expectancy would probably have lasted; central to that calculation is the probable length of the deceased’s working life at the date of death. As to the multiplier Halsbury states : However the multiplier is a figure considerably less than the number of years taken as the duration of the expentancy. Since the dependants can invest their damages, the lump sum award in respect of future loss must be discounted to reflect their receipt of interest on invested funds, the intention being that the dependants will each year draw interest and some capital (the interest element decreasing and the capital drawings increasing with the passage of years), so that they are compensated each year for their annual loss, and the fund will be exhausted at the age which the Court assesses to be the correct age, having regard to all contingencies. The contingencies of life such as illness, disability and unemployment have to be taken into account. Actuarial evidence is admissible, but the Courts do not encourage such evidence. The calculation depends on selecting an assumed rate of interest. In practice about 4 to 5 per cent is selected, and inflation is disregarded. It is assumed that the return on fixed interest bearing securities is so much higher than 4 to 5 per cent that rough and ready allowance for inflation is thereby made. The multiplier may be increased where the plaintiff is a high tax payer. The multiplicand is based on the rate of wages at the date of trial. No interest is allowed on the total figure.” 13. The said principle has been reiterated by the Supreme Court in the case of New India Assurance Co. The multiplier may be increased where the plaintiff is a high tax payer. The multiplicand is based on the rate of wages at the date of trial. No interest is allowed on the total figure.” 13. The said principle has been reiterated by the Supreme Court in the case of New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Smt. Kalpana and others (supra). In the case at hand, as would be evident from the judgment the Tribunal has not kept the above principle in mind and has assessed the compensation basing on the gross salary of the deceased. 14. The only other point which needs to be considered in the case is with regard to the rate of interest. Law is well settled that the rate of interest must be reasonable depending upon the facts and circumstances of each case and the same should be awarded taking all the relevant factors including inflation, change of economy and the amount proposed to be awarded. 15. Considering all the facts and circumstances of the case and after assessing the evidence in extenso as also keeping in mind the take home salary of the deceased on the date of accident and the age of the deceased, in a spirit of Lok Adalat, this Court feels that a compensation of Rs. 3,50,000/- (Rupees three lakhs fifty thousand) with interest thereon @ 7.5% per annum from 25.2.2004 till realization would be just and proper, and directs accordingly. 16. Mr. Mohanty, learned counsel for the Insurance Company, submits that the owner of the vehicle committed certain breach of policy conditions. But then the notice issued on the owner having returned unserved this Court directed to take steps for substituted service. Accordingly, the notice was published in consonance with Order 5, Rule 20, C.P.C. and the same has to be treated as sufficient. In spite of notice the owner of the of¬fending vehicle has not appeared. But then in consonance with the decision of the Supreme Court as well as of this Court for breach of policy conditions, the poor claimant should not suffer. In consonance with the ratio of the said decision in the case of “New India Assurance Co. In spite of notice the owner of the of¬fending vehicle has not appeared. But then in consonance with the decision of the Supreme Court as well as of this Court for breach of policy conditions, the poor claimant should not suffer. In consonance with the ratio of the said decision in the case of “New India Assurance Co. Ltd., Shimla v. Kamla and others report¬ed in AIR 2001 SC 1419 ” and under Section 149 of the M.V.Act, this Court grants liberty to the Insurance Company to first pay the amount and then realize the same from the owner of the of¬fending vehicle, if according to it, there is any breach of policy condition. 17. The appellant-Insurance Company is directed to deposit the entire amount as per this judgment before the Tribunal within six weeks from the date of communication of the order to the Tribunal. After the deposit is made, the same shall be disbursed in favour of the petitioner-appellants as per the stipulations made by the Tribunal in the impugned judgment proportionately apportioning the same. 18. The statutory deposit made before this Court shall be returned to the appellant-Insurance Company with interest accrued thereon on proper application by a crossed cheque/draft after the entire amount with interest is deposited before the Tribunal. With the aforesaid modification of the impugned award, both the MACAs are disposed of. MACAs disposed of.