JUDGMENT : N.K. Mody, J. This order shall also govern the disposal of M.A. No. 985 of 2007 as both the appeals are arising against the award dated 8.12.2006 passed by the M.A.C.T., Indore in Claim Case No.185 of 2002 whereby claim petition filed by appellants was allowed and compensation of Rs. 7,41,551 was awarded. In M.A. No. 1515 of 2007 prayer is that the amount awarded by the learned Tribunal is on lower side, which deserves to be enhanced, while in M.A. No.985 of 2007 which is filed by the respondent No.2, insurance company, prayer is that the amount awarded is on higher side, which deserves to be reduced. 2. It is not necessary to narrate the entire facts in detail, such as how the accident occurred, who was negligent in driving the offending vehicle, who is liable for paying compensation, etc. It is for the reason that, firstly, all these findings are recorded in favour of the claimants by the Tribunal. Secondly, none of these findings though recorded in claimants favour are under challenge at the instance of any of the respondents such as owner/driver or insurance company either by way of cross-appeal or cross-objection. In this view of the matter, there is no justification to burden the judgment by detailing facts on all these issues. 3. As observed supra, it is a death case. On 6.4.2002 Kiran Kumar Modi, aged 62 years, met with a motor accident and died, giving rise to filing of claim petition by legal representatives (appellants herein) out of which this appeal arises seeking compensation for his death. The case was contested by the respondents. Parties adduced evidence. The Claims Tribunal by impugned award partly allowed the claim petition filed by claimants and, as stated supra, awarded a sum of Rs. 7,41,551, the break-up of which is as under : Loss of dependency Rs. 3,61,784 Loss of consortium Rs. 15,000 Funeral expenses Rs. 2,000 Loss to estate Rs. 2,500 Medical expenses Rs. 2,90,267 Loss of love and affection Rs. 70,000 Total Rs. 7,41,551 4. Learned counsel for the appellants submit that after assessing the loss of dependency the income of the deceased has been assessed by the learned Tribunal at Rs. 5,652 per month and after deducting 1/3rd towards personal expenses multiplier of 8 has been applied. 2,500 Medical expenses Rs. 2,90,267 Loss of love and affection Rs. 70,000 Total Rs. 7,41,551 4. Learned counsel for the appellants submit that after assessing the loss of dependency the income of the deceased has been assessed by the learned Tribunal at Rs. 5,652 per month and after deducting 1/3rd towards personal expenses multiplier of 8 has been applied. It is submitted that the deceased was in the service of bank, from where deceased was compulsorily retired upon age of superannuation. It is submitted that the deceased was working as account consultant after his retirement, which took place in the month of May 2002. It is submitted that the deceased was working with M/s Lakhotiya Automobiles, Indore, M/s Friends Computers Service, Indore and M/s Madanlal Sancheti & Associates, from where deceased was getting a sum of Rs. 10,500 per month. It is submitted that this income was not taken into consideration by the learned Tribunal while assessing the compensation. It is submitted that on other heads also amount awarded by the learned Tribunal is on lower side. It is submitted that the appeal filed by the appellants be allowed and the appeal filed by respondent No. 2 be dismissed and the amount of compensation be enhanced. 5. Learned counsel for respondent No. 2 submits that the amount awarded by the learned Tribunal is on higher side. It is submitted that the learned Tribunal, after taking into consideration the evidence adduced by appellants to prove that deceased was in employment, found that a false and concocted story has been prepared to get higher amount of compensation. It is submitted that the learned Tribunal committed error in taking into consideration the income of the deceased at Rs. 5,652 per month and did not take into consideration the fact that the appellant No. 1 is getting a sum of Rs. 4,670 per month as family pension, which ought to have been deducted from the amount of loss of dependency. It is submitted that the appeal filed by appellants be dismissed and appeal filed by the respondent No. 2 be allowed and amount of compensation be reduced. 6. From perusal of the record it is evident that in a motor accident Kiran Kumar Modi died on 6.4.2002, whose date of birth was 7.5.1940, thus on the date of accident his age was 62 years. Exh. P11 to Exh. 6. From perusal of the record it is evident that in a motor accident Kiran Kumar Modi died on 6.4.2002, whose date of birth was 7.5.1940, thus on the date of accident his age was 62 years. Exh. P11 to Exh. P13 are the certificates issued by M/s Lakhotiya Automobiles, Indore, Friends Computers Service, Indore and Madanlal Sancheti & Associates. In all the three certificates it is mentioned that a sum of Rs. 30,500 was paid to the deceased for the period from 1.1.2002 to 31.3.2002. Exh. P14 is the income tax return, which was filed on 26.7.2002, i.e., after the death. Exh. P17 to Exh. P105 are the documents which show the amount which was spent in his treatment, Exh. P106 to Exh. P123 are the statement of account of M/s Lakhotiya Automobiles, Indore, Exh. P 124 and Exh. P125 are the documents issued by Suyas Hospital and Gurjar Hospital, Indore, Exh. P126 to Exh. P155 are the documents relating to M/s Friends Computers Service, Indore, Exh. P156 is the family pension order, Exh. P157 is the pension worksheet issued by UCO Bank, Exh. P158 is the family pension disbursement order. Apart from this, appellants have examined Ashok Kumar Gupta, AW 1, Sanjay Modi, AW2, Mukesh Kumar Lakhotiya, AW3, Jagdishchandra Tank, AW4, Dr. Chanlal Gurjar, AW5, Suresh Sancheti, AW6, Dr. Deepak Kulkarni, AW7 and B.S. Bhati, AW8. In rebuttal, respondent No. 2 has filed the documents. Exh. D1 is the specimen signature of deceased Kiran Kumar Modi, Exh. D2 is the opinion of handwriting expert. Respondent No. 2 examined D.M. Chakravarti, DW1, and Harvansh Tuteja, DW2. 7. From perusal of the record it is evident that while assessing the loss of dependency learned Tribunal has taken into consideration the income of the deceased at Rs. 5,652, which is the amount which was being received by the deceased as pension. The learned Tribunal has also applied the multiplier of 8. Since the deceased was aged 61 years and 11 months on the date of accident, which took place on 6.4.2002, therefore, keeping in view the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transport Corporation, 2009 ACJ 1298 (SC), multiplier of 7 ought to have been applied. Since the deceased was aged 61 years and 11 months on the date of accident, which took place on 6.4.2002, therefore, keeping in view the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transport Corporation, 2009 ACJ 1298 (SC), multiplier of 7 ought to have been applied. So far as the income from other sources is concerned, an effort was made by the claimants to demonstrate that deceased was working at three different places and was earning Rs. 3,500 from each of the employers, which is unbelievable. Much controversy is on this account. However, keeping in view that the deceased was of the age of 62 years and was in the bank job, it can be presumed that deceased must be doing some sort of job. In the facts and circumstances of the case income of the deceased is further assessed at Rs. 4,348 per month. So far as amount awarded for love and affection is concerned, Rs. 70,000 appears to be on higher side and on account of funeral expenses and loss to estate the amount awarded appears to be on lower side. Since the deceased was hospitalised for a period of ten days, therefore, amount awarded only on account of medical expenses appears to be on lower side as no amount has been awarded on account of pecuniary losses. In view of this, amount awarded is re-assessed and the appellants are entitled for the following amount : Medical expenses Rs. 2,90,267 Pecuniary losses Rs. 25,000 Funeral expenses Rs. 5,000 Loss to estate Rs. 5,000 Loss of consortium Rs. 5,000 Loss of love and affection Rs. 15,000 Loss of dependency Rs. 5,60,000 Total Rs. 9,05,267 8. Thus, appellants are entitled to a sum of Rs. 9,05,267, instead of Rs. 7,41,551. The enhanced amount of Rs. 1,63,716 shall carry interest at the rate of 8 per cent per annum from the date of application. 9. With the aforesaid modification both the appeals stand disposed of. Let a copy of this order be placed in the record of M.A. No. 985 of 2007. No order as to costs. Appeals disposed of.