JUDGMENT Mr. M. Jeyapaul, J.: - The widow and two minor sons of the deceased Shyam Bahadur aged 45 years have come forward with the present appeal challenging not only the quantum of compensation fixed by the Tribunal but also the exoneration of the Insurance Company from the entire liability. 2. The deceased Shyam Bahadur was 45 years old at the time when the accident took place. It was established on record that he was drawing a sum of Rs.4175/- per month. The Tribunal reduced a sum of Rs.665/- towards House Rent allowed to the deceased from the total emoluments and thereafter deducted 1/3rd therefrom. Having applied the multiplier of 13 the Tribunal arrived at the loss of dependency. The Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.20,000/- towards loss of consortium of the 1st appellant Meena and a sum of Rs.20,000/- towards funeral expenses. The future prospect of the deceased was not taken into consideration. Nothing was awarded towards transportation expenses. The Insurance Company was completely relieved of from the liability to answer the claim as the Tribunal came to the conclusion that the driver of the offending vehicle namely Mahindra Champion Auto which is a alight commercial vehicle possessed only a driving license for motor cycle and three seater vehicle. 3. The learned counsel for the appellant would make four fold submissions. 1) The Tribunal should have applied the multiplier of 14, when it was established that the deceased was 45 years old at the time of accident. 2) No amount towards house rent should have been deducted from the salary of the deceased. 3) The future prospects was not taken into consideration and no transportation expenses were awarded. 4) As it is only a violation of condition of the policy even as per the decision arrived at by the Tribunal, the Insurance Company should have been directed to pay the compensation awarded and a right to recover the compensation paid by it should have been given to it. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the 1st respondentdriver cum owner of the offending Mahindra Champion Auto vehicle would submit that the 1st respondent also sustained injury in the accident. At any rate the Tribunal has awarded just compensation. 5. The learned counsel appearing for the Insurance Company would submit that there is no evidence to show that the deceased had future prospects in his career. At any rate the Tribunal has awarded just compensation. 5. The learned counsel appearing for the Insurance Company would submit that there is no evidence to show that the deceased had future prospects in his career. A sum of Rs.20,000/- was awarded towards loss of consortium and an equal amount was awarded towards funeral expenses. He would further submit that the Tribunal has rightly fastened the entire liability on the owner cum driver of the offending vehicle, completely relieving the Insurance Company from answering the liability. 6. It has been established before the Tribunal that the deceased Shyam Bahadur was 45 years old at the time when the accident took place and that he was drawing a sum of Rs.4175/- per month. As per the ratio laid down in “Sarla Verma and others vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and another, [2009(3) Law Herald (SC) 2107 : 2010(1) Law Herald (Acc.) (SC) 65] : 2009(6)SCC 121”, the correct multiplier to be applied in the present case is 14 and not 13. Further the house rent allowance given to the deceased should not have been deducted as the legal heirs on his death would loose such a concession availed by the deceased on his death. Further, as rightly pointed out by the learned counsel appearing for the appellant, 30% of the income should have been added to the income arrived at by the Tribunal considering the future prospects. Further towards transportation of the dead body nothing was awarded by the Tribunal but as rightly pointed out by learned counsel appearing for the respondents, a disproportionate amount of Rs.20,000/- towards loss of consortium and Rs.20,000/- towards funeral expenses was awarded. 7. In view of the above, a sum of Rs.6,11,184/- (4175 + 30% thereof = 5457 – 1/3rd thereof =3638 x 12 = 43,656 x 14 = 6,11,184) towards loss of dependency, Rs.10,000/- towards loss of consortium, Rs.10,000/- towards funeral expenses, Rs.5,000/- towards transportation expenses, in aggregate a sum of Rs.6,36,184/-, is awarded with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum on the enhanced compensation from the date of petition till the date of realisation is awarded. 8. 8. As it is a case of violation of the terms and conditions of the policy, as rightly pointed out by learned counsel appearing for the appellant, the Insurance Company should have been directed first to pay the entire compensation awarded then recover the same from the first respondent who is owner cum driver of the vehicle. Therefore, the second respondent-Insurance Company is directed to honor the award first. The Insurance Company is given a right to recover the entire amount paid by it to the claimants from the first respondent. 9. With the above modification in the judgment of the Tribunal, the appeal is partly allowed.