ORDER U.C. Maheshwari, J. 1. The appellants-claimants have preferred this appeal under Section 173 of Motor Vehicle Act 1988, in short "The Act" for enhancement of the sum awarded by the 11th AM ACT, Jabalpur in MVC No. 47/06, vide award dated 22.3.2010, whereby the claim of the appellants with respect of the death of Vinod Naryani, the husband of appellant no. 1 while the father of remaining appellants in the alleged vehicular accident has been awarded only for the sum of Rs. 7,80,000/-along with interest @ 6% p.a. from 4.1.06, the date of filing the claim petition. 2. The appellants herein filed their claim in the Tribunal contending that on dated 24.12.05 at about 1 o'clock in the noon aforesaid Shri Vinod Naryani was going to Beiragarh on his scooter bearing registration no. MP-04-NL-3461. At the same time the offending vehicle Tata Spacious bearing registration no. MP-04-HB-0574 driven by respondent no. 1 in rash and negligent manner came from the opposite side and on the way in front of Sun City Marriage Garden dashed the scooter of said Shri Vinod Naryani. Resultantly alongwith the scooter Shri Vinod Naryani fell down and died on the spot. On receiving the information of the accident, a Crime No. 455/05 was registered against the respondent no. 1 at Police Station Kohefiza for the offence under Sections 304-A, 279,337 of IPC. After holding the investigation, the respondent no. 1 was charge sheeted for such offence. As per further averments, the deceased was 31 years of the age on the date of his death and was running a Glossary cum General Stores Shop near the Railway Station, Bhopal. Out of such business, he was earning Rs. 15,000/-per month. The appellants were fully defendants on him. The deceased was bearing expenses of education of his children, i.e. appellant nos. 2 and 3 near about Rs. 2000/-per month. Besides that after deducting the whole expenses, he was saving near about Rs. 8,000/-per month. Out of them some was kept in the bank account and some was kept at home. Due to untimely death of said Vinod Naryani, the appellants have been deprived from their dependency. It is also stated that the offending vehicle was registered in the name of respondent no. 2, while the same was insured with respondent no. 3. With these pleadings the appellants have preferred their claim for the sum of Rs. Due to untimely death of said Vinod Naryani, the appellants have been deprived from their dependency. It is also stated that the offending vehicle was registered in the name of respondent no. 2, while the same was insured with respondent no. 3. With these pleadings the appellants have preferred their claim for the sum of Rs. 20,75,000/-along with interest @ 18% p.a. with further prayer to saddle the liability of the same jointly and severally against all the respondents. 3. In reply of the respondent nos. 1 and 2 by denying the averments of the claim petition, it is stated that no negligence has been committed by respondent no. 1 while driving the aforesaid offending vehicle. It is also stated that on the date of the incident, the respondent no. 1 was having duly and effective driving license. A copy of the same is also annexed with the reply. As per further averments on holding any liability against them, then the same be saddled against the respondent no. 3-Insurer as their vehicle was duly insured with it. Subsequent to filing the reply, the respondents became absent from the Tribunal, hence the case was proceeded exparte against them. 4. In reply of respondent no. 3-Insurer, by denying the averments of the claim petition, it is stated that at the time of accident the respondent no. 1 was not having duly and effective driving to drive the offending vehicle and in such premises, the liability to indemnify the impugned claim could not be saddled against it. It is also stated that the appellants have preferred their claim at the higher side by stating some incorrect facts and prayer for dismissal of the claim is made. 5. In view of the pleadings of the parties, after framing the issues, the evidence was recorded. On appreciation of the same, it was held that the aforesaid Vinod Naryani died due to rash and negligent driving of aforesaid offending vehicle by respondent no. 1, on further appreciation, by holding the income of the deceased, Rs. 6,000/-per month, after deducting l/3rd from it, on account of expenses of the deceased, the assessment of compensation was carried out and in such premises, the claim of the appellants was awarded for the sum, as mentioned above. Being dissatisfied with the awarded sum, the appellants have come forward to this court for further enhancement of the same. 6. 6,000/-per month, after deducting l/3rd from it, on account of expenses of the deceased, the assessment of compensation was carried out and in such premises, the claim of the appellants was awarded for the sum, as mentioned above. Being dissatisfied with the awarded sum, the appellants have come forward to this court for further enhancement of the same. 6. Smt. Devika Singh, learned appearing counsel for the appellants, after taking me through the pleadings, evidence and the exhibited documents on record said that the appellants had successfully proved by cogent and reliable evidence that the deceased was running a Glossary cum General Stores Shop situated near Railway Station, Bhopal, from which he was earning near about Rs. 15,000/-per month. She further said that out of such income the deceased was spending Rs. 2000/-per month on the education of his children-appellant nos. 2 and 3 and was also depositing Rs. 150-200 per day with some bank in some regular deposit scheme. He was also affording the regular domestic and house hold expenses of his family and in such premises, in any case the income of the deceased could not be assessed by the Tribunal less than Rs. 500/-per day. In continuation she said that while assessing the income of the deceased, the Tribunal has not considered the un rebutted evidence adduced on behalf of the appellants and contrary to that the income of the deceased was assessed at very lower side, i.e. only Rs. 200 per day and accordingly Rs. 6000/-per month. In support of such arguments, she also referred the exhibited documents, like pass book and other relevant papers showing the different expenses of the deceased towards his children and family. With these arguments, she said that the Tribunal has committed grave error in not taking into consideration the correct income of the deceased and prayed to enhance the sum awarded by the Tribunal taking into consideration the income of the deceased @ Rs. 15,000/-per month by allowing this appeal. 7. Shri K.K. Singh and Shri Brajendra Mishra, learned appearing counsel for respondent no. 3-Insurer by justifying the impugned award argued that same is based on proper appreciation of the evidence and also in conformity with law. In the available circumstances, the sum awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper. It does not require any further enhancement at the stage of appeal. 3-Insurer by justifying the impugned award argued that same is based on proper appreciation of the evidence and also in conformity with law. In the available circumstances, the sum awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper. It does not require any further enhancement at the stage of appeal. He also argues that in the lack of any copy the income tax return or other positive documents on record showing the income of the deceased as argued by the appellant's counsel, the earning of the deceased could not be taken into consideration more than Rs. 6000/-per month and in such premises also the impugned award does not require any interference and prayed for dismissal of this appeal. 8. Having heard the counsel, keeping in view their arguments, I have carefully examine the record of the Tribunal and also perused the impugned award. 9. As per findings of the Tribunal the deceased was running a Glossary cum General Stores near about Railway Station, Bhopal and such finding is not under challenge in this appeal. In such premises, court has to decide this appeal that deceased was running the aforesaid shop near Railway Station, Bhopal. After taking into consideration the pass books of the deceased, in which the regular deposits were made by the deceased, education expenses of the children so also the domestic and house hold expenses, the Tribunal held the income of the deceased @ Rs. 200 per day only. 10. The alleged place where the shop of the deceased was situated is one of the main business centers of Bhopal. If the shop of Glossary cum General Stores was situated nearby Railway Station of Bhopal, then the shopkeeper of such shop, the deceased could not be deemed or held to be a person earning only Rs. 200 per day, specially when he was regularly depositing Rs. 100, 150 to 200 per day with some bank in daily deposit scheme, as evident from Ex. P-11 and P-12 and was also spending near about 1000 per month for each of the children-the appellant nos. 2 and 3 on their education, i.e. near about 2000 per month, as evident from Ex. P-14, P-16, P-17, P-18, P-19 and P-16 to P-23. Besides fees of the appellant nos. 2 and 3, he was also affording additional expenses of their tuition and the monthly fair of the Auto whereby the appellant nos. 2 and 3 on their education, i.e. near about 2000 per month, as evident from Ex. P-14, P-16, P-17, P-18, P-19 and P-16 to P-23. Besides fees of the appellant nos. 2 and 3, he was also affording additional expenses of their tuition and the monthly fair of the Auto whereby the appellant nos. 2 and 3 were used to go their schools. The appellant nos. no. 2 and 3 were taking education in some reputed school of English Medium at Bhopal, as evident from their progress reports and other documents. All such documents have been proved by the appellant no. 1 Smt. Kavita @ Poonam Naryani, the wife of the deceased. It is apparent fact on record that such evidence has not been rebutted in any manner on behalf of the respondents either by examining any witness or placing any document in the such cross examination of Smt. Kavita @ Poonam Naryani, (AW-1). In view of such evidence, keeping in view that the shop was situated nearby Railway Station, Bhopal and out of the income of the aforesaid shop, he was affording all the aforesaid expenses and saving the sum and in such premises, taking into consideration the standard of living, the deceased and his family, the income of the person in any case could not be assessed less than Rs. 350/-per day and in such premises, it is held that the Tribunal has erred in taking into consideration the income of the deceased @ Rs. 200 per day and pursuant to that the Tribunal also erred in assessing the total compensation at the lower side in passing the impugned award. The income of the deceased is held @ Rs. 350/-per day till this extent the finding of the Tribunal is modified. 11. In the aforesaid circumstances the impugned award requires some modification for further enhancement of the some. 12. In view of the aforesaid discussion, taking into consideration the income of the deceased Rs. 350 per day, the assessment is carried out. On taking the same, the monthly income of the deceased comes to Rs. 350 x 30= Rs. 10,500/-. In such premises, his yearly income comes to Rs. 10500x12= Rs. 1,26,000/-. Out of such sum, l/3rd is deducted on account of expenses of deceased, which he would have spent on him, had he been alive. Then the annual dependency of the appellants comes to Rs. 1,26,000-42000=84000/-. 350 x 30= Rs. 10,500/-. In such premises, his yearly income comes to Rs. 10500x12= Rs. 1,26,000/-. Out of such sum, l/3rd is deducted on account of expenses of deceased, which he would have spent on him, had he been alive. Then the annual dependency of the appellants comes to Rs. 1,26,000-42000=84000/-. In view of the principle laid down by the Apex Court in the matter of Sarla Verma (Smt.) and others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and another reported in (2009) 6 SCC 121 keeping in view the age of the deceased, i.e. 35 years, as held by the Tribunal on applying the multiplier of 16, the total dependency comes to Rs. 84,000x 16= 13,44,000/-. Besides this the appellants are also entitled for Rs. 20,000/-on the head of funeral expenses, loss of expectancy of life, loss of estate of the deceased and the appellant no. 1 for loss of company of her husband. Accordingly the total claim of the appellants is awarded for the sum of Rs. 13,44,000/-, (Rs. Thirteen lacs, forty four thousand). 13. In view of the aforesaid discussion, by allowing this appeal in part, the sum awarded by the Tribunal Rs. 7,80,000/-is enhanced from such amount to Rs. 13,64,000/-(thirteen lacs, sixty four thousand), as discussed above. Besides this the appellants are also entitled to interest @ 6% p.a. on the aforesaid enhanced sum. The liability to pay the enhanced sum is saddled jointly and severally against respondent nos. 1, 2 and 3 with a direction to deposit the same with the tribunal within three months from today. In the facts and circumstances of the case there shall no order as to the costs. Till this extent the impugned award of the Tribunal is modified while other findings of the Tribunal are hereby affirmed. 14. The appeal is allowed in part, as indicated above.