JUDGMENT K.C. Puri, J. (Oral).:- There is a delay of 8 days in filing and delay of 42 days in re-filing the present appeal. The same stands condoned on the grounds mentioned in the application. 2. This is an appeal directed by widow, minor son and parents of Gurtej Singh – deceased, who died in a motor vehicular accident. 3. The Tribunal accepted the claim petition and allowed a sum of Rs.3,90,000/- as compensation. The income of the deceased was taken as Rs.3,000/- per month and the annual income was taken as Rs.36,000/- (3000 X 12). After deducting 1/3rd on account of personal expenses of the deceased, the annual dependency was taken as Rs.24,000/-. The deceased was aged 23 years and multiplier of 15 was applied. In this manner, the amount of compensation was calculated as Rs. 3,60,000/- (24,000 X 15). Another sum of Rs. 20,000/- was allowed on account of loss of consortium and Rs.10,000/- was allowed on account of funeral expenses, last rites etc. 4. Feeling dissatisfied with the above said award, the present appeal has been filed for enhancement of compensation. 5. This is an appeal for enhancement and as such other facts need not be narrated. 6. Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that income of Rs.3,000/- per month as assessed by the Tribunal is on lower side. 7. However, I do not find any force in that submission. The income has to be assessed keeping in view the income of the deceased in the year 2007. So, the income of the deceased as assessed by the Tribunal is up held. The testimony of employer is not a gospel truth as the same is not corroborated by any other evidence. 8. Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that 1/4th amount should have been deducted in respect of personal expenses of the deceased, as per authority reported as Smt. Sarla Verma and others vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and another 2009(3) RCR (Civil) 77, as there are four dependents. 9. Learned counsel for the Insurance company has argued that father is not a dependent and as such there are 3 dependents and 1/3rd amount has been correctly deducted. 10. I have considered the submission made by counsel for the Insurance company, but do not find any force in that submission. It cannot be stated that father has not lost anything by the death of his con. 10. I have considered the submission made by counsel for the Insurance company, but do not find any force in that submission. It cannot be stated that father has not lost anything by the death of his con. The Tribunal has allowed the amount to father also. Moreover, no appeal has been preferred by the Insurance company. So, the above said contention stands repelled. 11. Learned counsel for the Insurance company has submitted that in the grounds of appeal, the factum of deduction of 1/3rd amount on account of personal expenses of the deceased, has not been challenged. 12. I have considered the said submission, but the law in this regard is well settled that claimants should get just compensation. In order to assess the just compensation, the guidelines have been laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Smt. Sarla Verma’s case (Supra). So, the above said argument is also without any merit. 13. The age of the deceased was 23 years. The claimants are four in number. The Tribunal should have assessed the dependency after deducting 1/4th amount in respect of personal expenses of the deceased. So, the by applying the cut of 1/4th, the dependency comes to Rs.2,250/- per month and the yearly dependency comes to Rs.27,000/- (2250 X 12). As per Smt. Sarla Verma’s case (Supra), the multiplier applicable for the age group of 15 to 25 is 18. So, by applying that multiplier, the amount of compensation comes to Rs.4,86,000/- (27,000 X 18). The Tribunal has granted an amount of Rs.20,000/- on account of loss of consortium and Rs.10,000/- has been granted on account of funeral expenses and last rites etc. So, the claimants are held entitled to claim Rs.5,16,000/-. The amount of compensation stands enhanced by Rs.1,26,000/-. The enhanced amount of compensation shall also carry interest @ 7% per annum from the date of filing of appeal till payment. The liability to pay the enhanced amount shall be the same as held by the Tribunal. The appeal stands disposed of. ----------------