JUDGMENT 1. - This miscellaneous appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 ('the Act of 1988') by the claimants appellants is directed against the award dated 30.09.1999 as made in Claim Case No.140/ 1994 by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Udaipur ('the Tribunal'). 2. By the award impugned, the Tribunal has awarded to the claimants appellants an amount of Rs. 79,600/- together with interest @ 8% per annum from the date of filing of the claim application for compensation on account of death of the vehicular accident victim Dharma, husband of the appellant No.l and father of the appellants Nos. 2 to 5. 3. The claimants-appellants contend that the amount awarded by the Tribunal is much on the lower side and needs to be enhanced. 4. The only question arising for consideration in this appeal being the quantum of just compensation, dilatation on all the background aspects does not appear necessary. Suffice is to notice for the present purpose that on 08.09.1993, the accident victim Dharma, said to be about 50 years in age and employed as a cleaner on the tanker bearing registration No. RJ 27 G 0299, sustained injuries on account of the vehicle capsizing; and he expired due to such injuries. The Tribunal has found that the accident occurred for rash and negligent driving of the said tanker bearing registration No.RJ 27G 0299; and has held the persons related with the tanker, the non-applicants Nos. 1 to 3, liable for compensation. 5. On quantification, the Tribunal took the age of the deceased with reference to the post-mortem report at 50 years and assessed the pecuniary loss of the claimants at an amount of Rs. 67,600/- while taking the income of deceased at Rs. 1000/- per month and while applying the multiplier of 8 after deducting Rs. 300/- towards personal expenses of the deceased. The Tribunal further awarded to the claimants an amount of Rs. 12,000/- towards general damages and in this manner, made the award in their favour in the sum of Rs. 79,600/-. 6. The learned counsel for the appellants has strenuously argued for enhancement of compensation in this case with the submissions that the amount awarded by the Tribunal on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, remains much on the lower side and is not that of just compensation. 79,600/-. 6. The learned counsel for the appellants has strenuously argued for enhancement of compensation in this case with the submissions that the amount awarded by the Tribunal on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, remains much on the lower side and is not that of just compensation. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the contesting respondents has duly supported the award impugned. 7. Having given a thoughtful consideration to the submissions made and having examined the record, this Court is of the view that the amount of compensation as awarded by the Tribunal remains rather on the lower side and calls for suitable enhancement. 8. In this nature cases, of course, no fixed or static formula is available for determining compensation under the Act of 1988; and the same is required to be determined taking into account the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court for these type of cases and on the basis of relevant factors and circumstances. 9. The age of the victim Dharma has been taken as 50 years on the basis of post mortem report. The claimant appellant No.l has deposed that her husband was earning Rs. 1,200/- per month while working as khalasi on a tanker. The Tribunal has assessed the pecuniary loss after taking the income of the deceased at Rs. 1,000/- per month and loss of dependency at Rs. 700/- per month with application of a multiplier of 8 only. There does not appear any reason not to accept the income of the deceased at Rs. 1,200/- per month and in the overall circumstances, even if deduction of one-third on his personal expenditure is made, the loss dependency at Rs. 800/- per month and thereby Rs. 9,600/- per annum could be reasonably assessed in respect of the dependants, the wife and four children, three of whom were minors at the relevant time. The age of the deceased having not been shown above 50 years, in the opinion of this Court, it would be proper to apply a multiplier of 13. Hence, the assessment of pecuniary loss comes to Rs. 1,24,800 (800 x 12 x 13); and while retaining the amount of Rs. 12,000/- towards general damages as awarded by the Tribunal, the claimants are held entitled to the total compensation in the sum of Rs. 1,36,800/-. 10. Hence, the assessment of pecuniary loss comes to Rs. 1,24,800 (800 x 12 x 13); and while retaining the amount of Rs. 12,000/- towards general damages as awarded by the Tribunal, the claimants are held entitled to the total compensation in the sum of Rs. 1,36,800/-. 10. The Tribunal has awarded in this case an amount of Rs. 79,600/- to the claimants-appellants. In view of the foregoing, the claimants are held entitled to further an amount of Rs. 57,200/- ( Rs. 1,36,800 - Rs. 79,600). This Court is of the view that the enhancement of the award amount by this sum of Rs. 57,200/- and allowing the same to the claimants together with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the claim application shall serve the cause of justice; and the resultant amount to be received by the claimants-appellants would be that of just and reasonable compensation. Accordingly and in view of the above, this appeal succeeds and is partly allowed; the impugned award dated 30.09.1999 is modified to the extent indicated above. The claimants-appellants shall be entitled towards compensation further an amount of Rs. 57,200/- together with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the claim application. 11. The respondents shall deposit the enhanced amount of compensation within 30 days from today with the Tribunal who shall carry out apportionment and disbursement in the manner and proportion as contemplated in the award impugned. There shall be no order as to costs of this appeal.Appeal partly allowed. *******