JUDGMENT Mahesh Grover, J.:-This appeal is directed against award dated 5.9.1992 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kurukshetra (for short, ‘the Tribunal’) in M.A.C.T.Case No.151 of 1991. 2. Om Parkash, husband of appellant no.1, father of appellant nos. 2 & 3 and son of appellant no.4, lost his life in a motor vehicular accident which took place on 21.8.1991. He was working as Mason with Northern Railways and was getting Rs.1405/-per month as gross salary. Exhibit-P1 is the certificate showing his salary as aforesaid, net payable as Rs.1319/-, his date of birth as 4.12.1958, date of appointment as 29.10.1979 and date of retirement as 31.12.2016. 3. After appraisal of the entire evidence on record, the Tribunal concluded that the accident occurred on account of rash and negligent driving of offending truck by its driver. 4. Thereafter, the Tribunal proceeded to assess the compensation payable to the claimants. It took the net salary of the deceased as his income and deducted Rs.500/- therefrom on account of personal expenses in order to determine the dependency at Rs.10,000/- per annum. Since the deceased was slightly less than 33 years of age at the time of his death, the Tribunal adopted a multiplier of ‘16’ to arrive at a figure of Rs.1,60,000/- which was awarded as compensation to the claimants. Besides, interest at the rate of 12% per annum was also allowed on the amount of compensation. 5. The insurance company of the offending vehicle,i.e., respondent no.3 was directed to pay the aforesaid compensation and interest to the claimants. 6. Feeling dis-satisfied, the present appeal has been filed by the claimants. 7. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, I am of the opinion that the impugned award in so far as it relates to the assessment of compensation is concerned, deserves to be modified. 8. It has come in the evidence that the deceased was regularly employed with the Northern Railways since the year 1979 and was to retire in the year 2016. Had he remained alive, he would have certainly progress in his career. Therefore, future prospects ought to have been taken into consideration while assessing his income. 8. It has come in the evidence that the deceased was regularly employed with the Northern Railways since the year 1979 and was to retire in the year 2016. Had he remained alive, he would have certainly progress in his career. Therefore, future prospects ought to have been taken into consideration while assessing his income. In such like cases, the principle to assess the income is to double the salary which a victim was drawing at the time of his death, then add one month’s salary to it and thereafter to take the average of these two figures for assessing the monthly income. If this principle is applied to the instant case, the monthly income of the deceased comes to Rs.2107/- (1405 + 1405= 2810 + 1405 divided by 2 = 2107). 9. To assess the dependency of the appellants, a deduction of 1/3rd on account of personal expenses from the monthly income of the deceased would be appropriate which has also been applied by the Tribunal. Thus, the dependency works out to Rs.1404/- per month, i.e., Rs.16848/- per annum. 10. The deceased was around 33 years old and, therefore, a multiplier of ‘17’ is adopted as it is in accordance with the Second Schedule of the Motor Vehicles Act,1988 which is a guiding factor. 11. In this way, the compensation comes to Rs.2,86,416/- (16848 x 17). An amount of Rs.20,000/- is also awarded on account of funeral expenses and loss of estate etc. Accordingly, the appellants are held entitled to receive a total compensation of Rs.3,06,416/-. The enhanced compensation shall be payable along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of claim petition till the date of realisation. The liability to pay the enhanced compensation and interest shall be the same as has been determined by the Tribunal. The impugned award is modified to the above extent and the appeal is allowed in the aforementioned terms. --------------------