JUDGMENT : K.S. Jhaveri, J. Though served none appears for the respondents. Since it is an old matter the matter is taken up for hearing today. 2. This appeal is directed against the judgment and award dated 26th December 1989 passed by the learned Motor accident Claims Tribunal (Main), Panchmahals, Godhra, whereby the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 1,20,000/- along with interest at 12% per annum from the date of the application till realization. 3. The short facts of the case are that on 19th December 1986 at about 2015 hours one Virsingbhai was walking on one side of the road in village Sajol. At that time driver of S.T. Bus No. GRR 9662 because of excessive speed lost control over steering and dashed with Virsingbhai. He therefore sustained serious injuries and later on succumbed to injuries. The legal heirs of said deceased Virsingbhai filed claim petition claiming Rs. 2,00,000/- by way of compensation. After hearing the parties, the Tribunal has passed the award as stated herein above. 4. Mr. M.D. Pandya, learned Advocate for the appellant submitted that in view of the robbery it cannot be said that there is any negligence on the part of the S.T. Corporation. He submitted that the Tribunal has committed an error in not deducting one third amount from the personal expenses of the deceased. According to him the multiplier is on higher side. 5. As regards the contention that there was no negligence on the part of the S.T. Corporation is concerned, I am of the view that in view of the smallness of the amount, it would not be necessary to go into that question. 6. As regards the contention with regard to deduction of one third income of the deceased is concerned, I am of the view that in view of the settled principle of law, the same is required to be accepted. The Tribunal ought to have deducted one third from the total income of the deceased. The monthly income of the deceased was taken at Rs. 600/- per month which was not disputed. Therefore after deducting one third, the dependence income would come to Rs. 4800/- per year. 7. The Tribunal has taken multiplier of 20. However, looking to the age of the deceased, I am of the view that multiplier of 15 would be just and proper. 600/- per month which was not disputed. Therefore after deducting one third, the dependence income would come to Rs. 4800/- per year. 7. The Tribunal has taken multiplier of 20. However, looking to the age of the deceased, I am of the view that multiplier of 15 would be just and proper. Therefore the total dependency benefit would come to Rs. 72000/- I am further of the opinion that the amount granted for loss of expectation of life at Rs. 10,000/- is just and proper. Thus, the claimants are entitled to a total sum of Rs. 82000/-. At the relevant the prevailing rate of interest was 12% and therefore I do not find any reason to interfere with the same. 8. In the premises aforesaid, the appeal is partly allowed. It is held that the original claimants shall be entitled to recover a sum of Rs. 82,000/- (Rupees eighty two thousand) from the original opponents along with interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum from he date of the application till realisation with proportionate costs. The appellant Corporation shall be paid the difference from the Fixed Deposit. Decree shall be drawn accordingly. No order as to costs. Appeal partly allowed.