JUDGEMENT 1. The New India Assurance Company Limited (hereinafter referred to as the "Insurance Company") has moved this Court against the judgment and award dated 7th October, 2005 passed by the 3rd Additional District Judge-cum-Motor Vehicles Accident Claims Tribunal, Gaya (hereinafter referred to as "the Tribunal"). 2. The factual aspect as far as the accident is concerned, is not disputed by the either parties. The question that has been raised by the Insurance Company in this case is two-folds. It is firstly contended that there is no documentary evidence to show that the petitioner was earning Rs. 5,000/- per month as salary at the time of his death. The second contention of the Counsel appearing on behalf of the Insurance Company is that the multiplier used for determining the amount of award to be given to the claimant should take into account the age of the claimant in cases where a young person dies. 3. The records of this case are before this Court. It appears from the deposition of AW-1 that Funan Khan was about 27 years of age and used to earn Rs. 5,000/- per month at the time of his death. It is also clear from the evidence of AW-1 that Funan Khan was working at Kolkata at the relevant time. Similarly, the other witnesses i.e. AWs-2, 3 and 4 have also stated that Funan Khan was working in Kolkata and he was earning Rs. 5,000/- per month. During cross-examination, the Insurance Company has not been able to dislodge this piece of evidence. Learned Counsel for the Insurance Company further submits that without any documentary evidence, the claimant cannot prove that the deceased was in fact earning a sum of Rs. 5,000/- per month. 4. In my opinion, persons in private employment can seldom produce any chit of paper much less a document to show the salary that they were getting from the private employer. To give an illustration, a driver working with a private person in Kolkata or in any other metropolitan, may be getting salary ranging from Rs. 4,000/- to Rs. 6,000/-, it would be almost impossible for such persons to produce a document to show that he was being paid salary of Rs. 4,000/- or above. In cases, where persons are in private employment as Accountants, Assistants, Typists etc. 4,000/- to Rs. 6,000/-, it would be almost impossible for such persons to produce a document to show that he was being paid salary of Rs. 4,000/- or above. In cases, where persons are in private employment as Accountants, Assistants, Typists etc. in small organizations at village level and in small towns have difficulty in producing the document to show that they were getting a particular amount as salary. And even if such a document or certificate is produced, it would be difficult to prove it and the Courts may doubt its authenticity. As such, this Court feels inclined to rely on the oral evidence in the facts of the present case specially as the Insurance Company has not been able to dislodge the oral evidence during the cross-examination. 5. The second contention raised on behalf of the Insurance Company is that the mother of the deceased Fatima Khatoon has been assessed to be of 65 years of age at the time when she deposed before the Tribunal. The Tribunal has directed the Insurance Company to pay the compensation amount of Rs. 3,64,500/- with an interest of 6 per cent per annum from the date of filing of the case without making any calculations or disclosing the reasons for arriving at the said figure. 6. Considering the view of the Supreme Court in the case of Ramesh Singh & Another Vs. Satbir Singh & Another, reported in (2008) 2 SCC 667 , this Court holds that the claimant would be entitled to the compensation amount of Rs. Two lacs plus Rs. 75,000/- as loss of consortium after taking into account that the deceased used to earn Rs. 5,000/- per month and using five as a multiplier after considering that the age of the claimant is 65 years. The sum of Rs. 2,07,500/- should be paid to the claimant within a period of two months from today alongwith the interest of 6 per cent per annum from the date the claim case was filed. If any further delay is made in making payment, the rate of interest will increase to 10 per cent on the compensation amount. 7. However, it is needless to mention here that if any amount has been paid to the claimant under Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act, the same would be deducted from the total compensation amount of Rs. 2,07,5000/-. 8. 7. However, it is needless to mention here that if any amount has been paid to the claimant under Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act, the same would be deducted from the total compensation amount of Rs. 2,07,5000/-. 8. Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Insurance Company is permitted to withdraw the statutory amount deposited in this Court. 9. This appeal is allowed to the extent indicated above.