1. This Civil 1st Miscellaneous Appeal is directed against the judgment and award dated 26.11.2009 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kathua in Claim petition no. 106/2002 titled as Darshana Devi and others v. Mohd Aslam Gujjar and others (for short, impugned award) whereby an award of Rs. 9,21,112/-along with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum came to be awarded in favour of the claimants from the date of filing of the claim petition till its realization on the grounds taken in the memo of appeal. Brief facts: Decesed Ved Vias became victim of motor vehicular accident, which was caused due to rash and negligent driving of driver of the offending vehicle. It is contended that deceased was travelling in the offending police gypsy bearing chassis no.192022 and Engine no. 244288 along with other police constables and they were going from Jammu to Srinagar. When said vehicle reached Meer Bazaar Qazigund, it turned turtle as a result of which deceased and others received serious injuries and deceased succumbed to the injuries in the hospital. The deceased was working as Selection Grade Constable no. 1389 and was posted in the Police Station, Gandhi Nagar, Jammu. He was getting a friendly salary of Rs. 8020/-. The age of deceased was 40 years at the time of his death. The claimants have claimed compensation to the tune of Rs. 14,56,000/- as per the break-ups given in the memo of claim petition. 2. The claim petition was contested by the respondents-appellants and they have pleaded that the accident took place due to the breakage of tyre rod as a result of which the driver could not control the speed. 3. From the pleadings of the parties, following issues came to be framed:- 1. Whether on 15.06.2000 at Meer Bazaar, Qazigund (Anantnag) respondent no.1 while under the employment of respondent no.2 was plying the vehicle, chassis no.192022 and Engine no. 24428 rashly and negligently in consonance whereof one Ved Vias son of Kli Dass, SGC, Jammu and Kashmir Police, Police Station, Gandhi Nagar, Jammu, R/O Village Sanyal, Tehsil Hiranagar, District Kathua got killed ? OPP. 2. In case issue no.1 is answered in affirmative, what amount of compensation the petitioners are entitled to and from whom ? OPP 3. Relief. Claimant Darshana Devi has examined herself and appeared in the witnesses box. OPP. 2. In case issue no.1 is answered in affirmative, what amount of compensation the petitioners are entitled to and from whom ? OPP 3. Relief. Claimant Darshana Devi has examined herself and appeared in the witnesses box. No evidence has been adduced by the respondents-appellants in rebuttal, thus evidence of claimant-Darshan Devi has remained un-rebutted. Learned counsel for the appellants has not questioned the findings returned on issue no.1. However, after scanning the evidence of the claimant-respondent no.1 which has remained un-rebutted, it is proved that the accident was caused due to rash and negligently driving of the driver of the offending vehicle which was being driven by its driver rashly and negligently in which deceased sustained grievous injuries. Thus, the findings returned by the Tribunal on issue no.1 are upheld and, accordingly, issue no.1 is decided in favour of the claimants-respondents. 4. Issue no. 2 Admittedly, the deceased was getting Rs. 8020/- per month rounded up to Rs. 8000/- per month out of which 1/3rd is to be deducted for his personal expenses which comes to Rs. 2666/-leaving behind a balance of Rs. 5334/- which can be treated as monthly economic loss to the claimants and annual loss would be Rs. 64,008/-. This amount of annual loss of dependency is to be multiplied by use of an appropriate multiplier. The age of deceased was 45 years as per death certificate and Tribunal has rightly applied multiplier 14, so loss of dependency comes to Rs. 8,96,112/-. The findings returned by the Tribunal issue wise are legal, need no interference and accordingly are upheld. 5. However, it appears that the Tribunal has fallen in an error while awarding Rs. 10,000/-under the head of "Loss of Consortium", Rs. 10,000/- on account of "Loss of Estate" and Rs. 5,000/- on account of "Funeral Expenses". As per 2nd Schedule appended with the Motor Vehicles Act, the claimants are entitled to Rs. 5000/- on account of "Loss of Consortium", Rs. 2500/- on account of "Loss of Estate" and Rs. 2000/- on account of "Funeral expenses" Viewed thus, the appeal is partly allowed and impugned award is modified holding that claimants are held entitled to Rs. 8,96,112/-(5334 x 12 x 14) plus Rs. 5000/-, Rs. 2500/- and Rs. 2000/- (Total Rs. 9,05,612/-) along with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of passing of the award till its realization. 8,96,112/-(5334 x 12 x 14) plus Rs. 5000/-, Rs. 2500/- and Rs. 2000/- (Total Rs. 9,05,612/-) along with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of passing of the award till its realization. The amount of compensation is directed to be released in favour of the claimant after proper identification and verification strictly in terms of the impugned award. The court fee shall be the first charge. Excess amount, if any, be released in favour of the appellants, through "Account Payees Cheque". Accordingly, award is modified to the extent as indicated above. Disposed of along with connected CMP(s). Registry to send down the records along with a copy of this order.