Judgment N.K. Mody, J. ( 1. ) This is an appeal filed by the claimant under section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act against an award dated 10.5.2006, passed by the First Additional M.A.C.T., Alirajpur in Claim Case No. 43 of 2006. By impugned award, the Tribunal has awarded a total sum of Rs.87,000 with interest to the claimants for the death of one Manibai, who died in a vehicular accident. According to claimants, the compensation awarded is on lower side and hence, needs to be enhanced. It is for the enhancement in the compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the claimant has filed this appeal. So the question that arises for consideration is whether any case for enhancement in compensation awarded by the Tribunal on facts/evidence adduced is made out and, if so, to what extent? ( 2. ) 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 the claimants by the 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, there is no justification to burden the judgment by detailing facts on all these issues. ( 3. ) As observed supra, it is a death case. On 7.4.2005, Manibai, aged 20 years met with a motor accident and died giving rise to filing of claim petition by her legal representatives (appellants herein) out of which this appeal arises seeking compensation for her death. The case was contested by the respondents. Parties adduced evidence. Claims Tribunal by impugned award partly allowed the claim petition filed by claimants and as stated supra, awarded a sum of Rs. 87,000, break-up of which is as under: ( 4. ) The learned counsel submits that the deceased was the daughter of appellants. It is further submitted that income of the deceased has been assessed at the rate of Rs. 15,000 per annum and after deducting 2/3rd amount towards personal expenses, loss of dependency has been calculated, which is on lower side. ( 5. ) The learned counsel submits that the deceased was the daughter of appellants. It is further submitted that income of the deceased has been assessed at the rate of Rs. 15,000 per annum and after deducting 2/3rd amount towards personal expenses, loss of dependency has been calculated, which is on lower side. ( 5. ) Learned counsel for respondent No. 3 submits that deceased was a girl aged 20 years and for assessing loss of dependency multiplier of 17 has been applied, which ought to have been 16. It is further submitted that in case of death of a girl the amount awarded by the learned Tribunal is just and proper. ( 6. ) I have gone through the evidence adduced by the claimants. After taking into consideration all the evidence on record this court is of the view that deceased was aged 20 years, therefore, income ought to have been assessed at the rate of Rs. 18,000 per annum and there was no justification for deducting 2/3rd amount for personal expenses it ought to have been 73rd. Multiplier of 17 has been applied on higher side, which ought to have been 16. In the facts and circumstances of the case the appellants are entitled for the following amount; ( 7. ) Thus, the appellants are entitled for Rs. 2,07,000, instead of Rs. 87,000. The enhanced amount of Rs. 1,20,000, shall carry interest at the rate of 7.5 per cent per annum. The enhanced amount shall be deposited by the learned Tribunal in FDR in a nationalised bank in the name of the appellant No. 2 in such a manner so that it should earn highest rate of interest which shall be payable to appellant No. 2 on monthly basis. Principal amount shall be payable by the bank in instalments looking to the needs of the appellants. ( 8. ) With the aforesaid modifications the appeal stands disposed of. No order as to costs. Appeal disposed of.