Judgment ( 1. ) THIS appeal is filed Motor Vehicles Act, challenging the award by the claimants under section 173 of the dated 12. 12. 2005 passed by the Motor accidents Claims Tribunal, Gwalior in claim Case No. 38 of 2004 whereby the claims Tribunal has awarded a sum of rs. 4,18,500 as compensation to the claimants for the death of Sanchita Agrawal who died in a motor accident. ( 2. ) IN brief, the facts of the case are that deceased Sanchita Agrawal was working as Vice Principal in Gwalior Glory Higher secondary School, Gwalior. On 13. 6. 2004 when she was travelling in car No. KA 04-N 2157, Swaraj Mazda minibus No. KA 01-D 0707 hit the car, as a result of which the deceased sustained injuries and succumbed to the injuries sustained by her. ( 3. ) AFTER her death, present appellants who are husband and daughter of the deceased filed claim petition claiming compensation. The Claims Tribunal found that deceased was Vice Principal in Gwalior glory Higher Secondary School, Gwalior and as per her income certificate, Exh. P4, she was drawing salary of Rs. 12,000 per month. The Claims Tribunal, however, assessed the monthly income of the deceased at Rs. 8,300, i. e. , on the basis of net salary and after deducting 73rd of the said amount towards self expenses of the deceased has awarded compensation. Hence, this appeal at the instance of the claimants for enhancement of compensation. ( 4. ) BOTH insurance companies have filed their cross-objections - I. A. No. 20448 of 2006 by United India Insurance Co. Ltd. and I. A. No. 82 of 2007 by New India assurance Co. Ltd.- challenging the apportionment of the award between them stating that driver of their respective vehicle was not negligent in the accident and, therefore, praying for fastening the liability on each other. These cross-objections are filed inter se by the two respondents, hence, they are not maintainable and are dismissed. ( 5. ) MOREOVER, in view of the Full Bench decision of this court in the case of Sushila bhadoriya v. Madhya Pradesh State Road trans. Corpn. , 2005 ACJ 831 (MP), the claimant has a right to recover compensation from any of the joint tortfeasors in a case of contributory (sic composite) negligence. ( 6. ) NOW the question remains is about the compensation. Exh. Corpn. , 2005 ACJ 831 (MP), the claimant has a right to recover compensation from any of the joint tortfeasors in a case of contributory (sic composite) negligence. ( 6. ) NOW the question remains is about the compensation. Exh. P4 is the salary certificate of the deceased showing that she was drawing Rs. 12,000 per month towards salary from the school. To prove the salary certificate, the claimants have examined one Arti Shrivastava, AW 2, who was the Vice Superintendent of the school. Thus, from the salary certificate, it is proved that the deceased was getting rs. 12,000 per month towards salary. Said salary was taxable under the provisions of income Tax Act. That apart, the deceased being Vice Principal, there were chances of her promotions. Hence, future prospects will have to be considered for assessing the income of the deceased. Considering both these factors, we can safely assess the income of the deceased at Rs. 10,000 per month, i. e. , Rs. 1,20,000 per annum. After deducting V3rd amount towards the self expenses of the deceased had she been alive she would have spent on herself, the annual dependency of the deceased comes to Rs. 80,000. Since the deceased was 36 years of age at the time of death, multiplier of 16 will be applicable in the present case. Applying the multiplier of 16, the compensation would come to Rs. 12,80,000. Apart from this, the claimants shall also be entitled to a sum of Rs. 20,000 towards loss of consortium, love and affection, loss to estate, funeral expenses, etc. Hence, the total amount of compensation comes to rs. 13,00,000. ( 7. ) HOWEVER, considering the fact that the appellants-claimants themselves have valued the appeal at Rs. 12,00,000, we award the total compensation to the tune of Rs. 12,00,000 (rupees twelve lakh ). The enhanced amount of compensation shall carry interest at the rate of 7 per cent per annum from the date of filing of the appeal till realization. ( 8. ) SO far as apportionment is concerned, the Claims Tribunal has already directed for 50 per cent apportionment between the two insurance companies and we maintain the aforesaid direction. ( 9. ) APPEAL succeeds and is allowed. Appeal allowed.