Judgment This appeal is directed against the award dated 31/1/1996 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Wardha in Claim Petition No.32/1992 whereby the appellants 1 and 2/original respondents 1 and 5 were made jointly and severally liable to pay compensation of Rs.6,50,000/-(Rs. Six Lac Fifty Thousand Only) with interest at the rate of Rs.18 % per annum from the date of application till its realization, to the claimants. The respondents 1 to 5 are the original claimants who approached the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal for award of compensation of Rs.10,000,00/-on account of death of Inderchand Sharma in a motor vehicular accident involving Jeep No.MH32/A99 and the Truck No. TN 33/Z -0669. There was head on collision of these two vehicles and in that Inderchand Sharma sustained injuries and died on the spot. The claimants are his widow, children and mother. They alleged that the deceased was serving in Mohota Mill as an Accountant on monthly salary of Rs.2,250/-. In addition to that, he was also doing job work for the different firms and thus his annual income was Rs.80,000/-. 2. On behalf of the claimants, two witnesses were examined. No witness was examined on behalf of the appellants. The learned Tribunal formulated the issues. After considering the evidence, it was held that the deceased died on account of rash and negligent driving of the truck. He considered Rs.70,000/-per annum as income of the deceased. After deducting 1/3rd amount towards his personal expenses had he been alive, the loss of dependency was considered at Rs.60,000/-. Considering the age of the deceased and children left behind him the learned Tribunal adopted multiplier of 13 and thus awarded total sum of Rs.6,50,000/-with interest at the rate of Rs.18 % per annum from the date of application till its realization. 3. Mrs. Khade, the learned counsel appearing for the appellants, contended that there are number of flaws in the award passed by the learned Tribunal. According to her, the learned Tribunal committed an error in holding that the deceased was getting monthly salary of Rs.2,250/-and he was also getting other income from the joint family business. In fact, there did exist no evidence to demonstrate this, she urged. Her next contention is that the learned Tribunal ought to have made the award inclusive of no fault liability amount of Rs.25,000/-which was paid to the claimants. In fact, there did exist no evidence to demonstrate this, she urged. Her next contention is that the learned Tribunal ought to have made the award inclusive of no fault liability amount of Rs.25,000/-which was paid to the claimants. The other ground of objection is that the learned Tribunal committed an error in awarding interest at the rate of Rs.18 % per annum. 4. Mr. Bhattad, the learned counsel appearing for the claimants/respondents, supported the judgment and award. According to him, the approach of the learned Tribunal is consistent with the evidence brought on the record and therefore, the award is not liable to be interfered with by this Court. 5. Ramawatar Yadao (P.W.1) is a Clerk serving in Vinay West Reclamation Private Limited, Hinganghat which is a sister concern of Mohota Mill where the deceased was serving. According to him, the deceased was serving as an Accountant in Mohota Mill. In addition to that, he used to deal in shares and also used to do job of writing private accounts. Vijay Sharma (P.W.2), claimant no.2 and son of the deceased, deposed that his father was getting Rs.2,000/-to Rs. 2,250/-per month by serving in Mohota Mill. According to him, the deceased was also doing job work of writing private accounts and was partner in Mahalaxmi Chemicals. His further evidence shows that the deceased was dealing in shares. The learned Tribunal relied upon the documents at Exhs.47 to 50 while coming to the conclusion that the total annual income of the deceased at the time of his death was about Rs.80,000/-. The evidence recorded by the learned Tribunal appears to be consistent with the evidence on the record and needs no interference. 6. The only issue that falls for consideration is the rate of interest awarded by the learned Tribunal. Mrs. Khade, the learned counsel appearing for the appellants, relied upon the decision in case of United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Bindu & Ors. reported in 2009 AIR SCW 1611. In that case, the Tribunal awarded compensation with interest at the rate of Rs.9% per annum from the date of the filing of the claim petition. Their Lordships reduced this to 6 % per annum by observing that it would be appropriate to fix the rate of interest at 6 % per annum. 7. reported in 2009 AIR SCW 1611. In that case, the Tribunal awarded compensation with interest at the rate of Rs.9% per annum from the date of the filing of the claim petition. Their Lordships reduced this to 6 % per annum by observing that it would be appropriate to fix the rate of interest at 6 % per annum. 7. While awarding interest at the rate of Rs.18 % per annum, the learned Tribunal observed that: "Generally, I would not have awarded interest on this amount more than 12 % per annum. But here I find that both the vehicles involved in the accident were insured with the same National Insurance Company Ltd., in spite of the same, instead of satisfying the claim of the applicants, all possible defences are taken to resist the claim of the applicants though it was a statutory duty of the insurer to satisfy the claim of the third party for which this social legislation is enacted. Therefore, in view of the approach taken by the non-applicant no.5 while resisting the claim of the applicants, I find that the applicants are entitled to the amount of compensation with interest at the rate of 18% per annum." Ex facie, the approach of the learned Tribunal appears erroneous. Merely for the reason that the Insurance Company had raised several defences and did not on their own made payment to the claimants, there should be no justification awarding higher rate of interest. The ground no.8 in memo of appeal recites that, the learned Tribunal should have awarded interest not more than 12% per annum. In that view of the matter, the rate of interest awarded by the learned Tribunal will have to be reduced to 12 % per annum. As regards not considering the amount awarded on account of no fault liability, the learned counsel for the claimants fairly accepts that this is a flaw committed by the learned Tribunal. In that view of the matter, appeal succeeds partly. 8. The amount of Rs.6,50,000/-awarded shall be inclusive of "no fault liability" amount already paid that means award shall be for Rs.6,25,000/-(Rs. Six Lac Twenty Five Thousand Only) with interest at the rate of Rs.12 % per annum from the date of application till its realization instead of 18 % per annum awarded by the Tribunal. 9. The liability be calculated accordingly. 10. Six Lac Twenty Five Thousand Only) with interest at the rate of Rs.12 % per annum from the date of application till its realization instead of 18 % per annum awarded by the Tribunal. 9. The liability be calculated accordingly. 10. It is clarified that the amount has been deposited with the Registry of this Court. Whatever amount lying with the Registry including the interest accrued thereon be transmitted to the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Wardha for disbursement to the claimants according to law. In the facts and circumstances of the case there shall be no order as to costs.