JUDGMENT 1. - The widow, appellant No.1, the parents, appellant Nos. 2 & 3, the children, appellant Nos. 4 to 7 have challenged the award dated 12.05.1998 passed by the Motor Accident Claim Tribunal, Bayana (for short, 'the learned Tribunal') whereby the learned Tribunal had granted compensation of Rs. 1,40,000/- along with interest @ 12% per annum for the death of Shri Bhajan Lal. 2. In a nutshell, the facts of the case are that in the evening of 24.04.1995, Bhajan Lal alongwith Sukha Ram and Champa Lal were travelling in a truck, which was carrying stones. On the way, there was a steep road and the truck could not climb it. Consequently, the truck started going backwards and finally turned turtle. Resultantly, Bhajan Lal and others suffered injuries. Although, they were hospitalized, but Bhajan Lal succumbed to his injuries. At the time of his death, he was thirty-five years old and he was earning about Rs. 3,000/- per month in the capacity of labourer and as a farmer. Since, the appellants are lost their sole bread earner, they filed a claim petition before the learned Tribunal. In order to substantiate their case, they examined a few witnesses and submitted ten documents. The Insurance Company did not examine any witness, but did submit two documents. After going through the oral and documentary evidence, the learned Tribunal granted compensation as aforementioned. Hence, this appeal for enhancement. 3. Mr. Mukesh Verma, the learned counsel for the appellant, has raised two contentions before this Court : firstly, according to the appellants, the deceased was thirty-five years of age at the time of accident. According to the Second Schedule attached to the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short, 'the Act'), a multiplier of sixteen should have been applied. However, the learned Tribunal, without assigning any reasons whatsoever, has applied a multiplier of only ten. Therefore, the award is a non-speaking one. Secondly, under the category of "loss of consortium", an amount of Rs. 5,000/- has been granted to the appellant No.1 and for "loss of love and affection", only an amount of Rs. 2,000/- has been granted to the appellant Nos.2 to 7. According to the learned counsel for the appellant, the compensation amount under the categories of "loss of consortium" and "loss of love and affection" is too meagre. 4. On the other hand, Mr. 2,000/- has been granted to the appellant Nos.2 to 7. According to the learned counsel for the appellant, the compensation amount under the categories of "loss of consortium" and "loss of love and affection" is too meagre. 4. On the other hand, Mr. B.N. Sandu, the learned counsel for the respondent No.4, the Insurance Company, has supported the impugned award. 5. In catena of cases, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has clearly held that the Second Schedule attached to the Motor Vehicles Act should be treated as a guidelines by the Tribunals. In case, the learned Tribunal wishes to deviate from the said guideline, it must give cogent reasons for such deviation. 6. A bare perusal of the impugned award clearly reveals that for the statement "application of multiplier of ten seems to be just and legal", no cogent reason has been given by the learned Tribunal. Such a vague statement amounts to a nonspeaking award. In the absence of any cogent reason, this court has no method of finding out the factors which weighed in the mind of learned Tribunal for applying the multiplier of ten instead of sixteen. Hence, this Court has no other option, but to modify the multiplier from ten to sixteen. Therefore, the "loss of dependency" should be calculated as Rs. 1,000X16X12= Rs. 1,92,000/-. 7. As far as the "loss of consortium" and "loss of love and affection" are concerned, it is a matter of discretion of the learned Tribunal, therefore, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the same. 8. In the result, this appeal is partly allowed and the impugned award dated 12.05.1998 is modified as under : (a) the "loss of dependency" should be calculated as Rs. 1,000X16X12=Rs. 1,92,000/-. (b) the rest of the award dated 12.05.1998 is confirmed. (c) The learned tribunal is directed to ensure that the appellants are granted the enhanced compensation amount alongwith interest within a period of one month from the date of receipt of certified copy of this judgment. Appeal partly allowed. *******