JUDGMENT Mr. Jitendra Chauhan, J. (oral) - The present appeal has been preferred by the claimant-appellants seeking enhancement of the amount of compensation awarded by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Faridabad, vide impugned Award dated 01.04.2009. 2. Brief facts of the case in hand are that on 23.01.2005 at about 11.30 p.m., the deceased Bijender Singh after attending to his duties, left Faridabad for Hodal by bus. After getting down from the bus, when he reached Charan Singh Chowk, while he was crossing the road, he was run over by a Tata Sumo bearing registration No.HR-61-1183. The said Sumo was being driven by respondent No.1-Rehmudin rashly and negligently. He ran away along with the offending vehicle. The deceased suffered serious injuries and died on the spot. The said incident was witnessed by Chowkidar namely Prahlad and he reported the matter to the police. An FIR No.16 dated 23.1.2005 under Sections 279, 304-A IPC was got registered with P.S. Hodal. As whereabouts of the deceased were not known, after his postmortem, his body was consigned to flames by the police. 3. In this background, on hearing about the accident, the claimants who are wife, minor children and mother of the deceased filed the claim petition MACT No.154 of 2008 was filed before the learned Tribunal seeking compensation. The learned Tribunal, vide Award dated 01.04.2009, awarded a total compensation of Rs.4,85,400/- (Rs.4,70,400 for loss of dependency + Rs.15,000/- on account of loss of consortium) to the appellants-claimants. Aggrieved therefrom, the appellants have preferred this appeal seeking enhancement. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 5. Learned counsel for the appellants-claimants contends that the age of the deceased was 42 years old. As per the ration card (Ex.P-11), the age of the deceased was 38 years which is duly issued by Competent Authority. On the statement of the co-passer, Prahlad-PW1, who moved the deceased to the hospital the age of the deceased was recorded as 42 years. In the absence of contrary evidence, the age mentioned in the Ration card which is issued by the State authority after verification can be safely accepted. Thus this Court holds that the deceased was 38 years at the time of his death. 6. In the absence of contrary evidence, the age mentioned in the Ration card which is issued by the State authority after verification can be safely accepted. Thus this Court holds that the deceased was 38 years at the time of his death. 6. Thus the learned Tribunal erred in not considering the age of the deceased as per ration card (Ex.P-11) and relying upon the statement of PW-1 Prahlad, who moved the deceased to the hospital. His monthly income has been assessed at Rs.4,200/- per month. The claimants were the wife; two minor sons and mother, who has since died during the pendency of the claim petition. The learned Tribunal has applied the deduction on account of personal expenses of the deceased as 1/3rd . However, keeping in view the number of claimants, which was four in the instant case, the deduction ought have been to the extent to 1/4th, as has been laid down by Hon’ble the Supreme Court in Smt. Sarla Verma and others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and another, [2009(3) Law Herald (SC) 2107 : 2010(1) Law Herald (Acc.) (SC) 65]2009(3) RCR (Civil) 77. It is held accordingly. Thus, the dependency of the claimants comes to Rs.3150/- per month. 7. As the deceased is held to be held 38 years old at the time of his death in the accident, the multiplier of 15 deserves to be applied. 8. In view of the above discussion, the claimants-appellants are held entitled to an amount of Rs.5,67,000/- (Rs.3,150/-x12x15) against the head ‘dependency’ as against the amount of Rs.4,85,000/-. A consolidated amount of Rs.20,000/- is awarded under all conventional heads. A amount of Rs.5,000/- is further awarded on account of loss to State as funeral charges. 9. Accordingly, the claimants-appellants shall be entitled to an amount of Rs.72,000/- as enhanced compensation, which shall be payable to them within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this judgment, failing which, they shall further be entitled to interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing the appeal., till its realisation. 10. The present appeal is partly allowed and the Award of the learned Tribunal dated 01.04.2009, is modified to the extent indicated above. --------------