Rajiv Sharma & Satish Chandra,JJ. Present appeal has been filed by the appellant-claimant under Section 173 of Motor Vehicle Act, 1988, against the judgment and order dated 25.11.2008, passed by the Motor Accident Claim Tribunal, Sultanpur, in Claim Petition No.159/08. 2. The brief facts of the case are that on 07.02.2008, at about 2.00 p.m., the deceased Sri Paltu Prasad was going on his motorcycle, when he reached near Anar Kali School, from the opposite direction a Bus bearing No. U.P.042T-5355, which was under the control of the Roadways, Sultanpur Depot, was coming. Its driver was driving the bus negligently and carelessly and dashed the motorcycle, which resulted the death of the deceased. Necessary FIR was lodged. The claimants-respondents have filed a claim petition, where the Tribunal has awarded a total compensation of Rs.12,18,378/- against the appellant-Insurance Company, as the bus was insured by the appellant-Insurance Company. Being aggrieved, the appellant-Insurance Company has filed the present appeal. 3. With this background, Sri Anil Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the appellant-Insurance Company submits that the accident happened due to the contributory negligence of both the vehicles. The bus was plying without permit. So, it is the violation of the terms and condition of the insurance policy. He also submits that the award is on higher side. 4. It is also a submission of the learned counsel for the appellant-Insurance Company that the interest @ 6% per annum has been given from the date of the accident. 5. On the other hand, Sri Prashant Singh Atal and Sri S.P. Singh, learned counsel for the opposite parties have justified the impugned order passed by the Tribunal. 6. After hearing all the parties and on perusal of the record, it appears that the accident is undisputed. The death of the deceased due to the accident is also undisputed. On the date of the accident, both the drivers were holding valid driving licence. The bus in question was insured by the appellant-Insurance Company and on the date of the accident, the policy was alive. The bus driver Sri Khurshid Ahmad was an expert driver. The bus was under the control of the U.P.S.R.T.C., but it was insured by the appellant-Insurance Company. So, the liability lies with the appellant-Insurance Company, who has taken the premium.? 7. The main dispute is regarding the quantum of the compensation. 8. The bus driver Sri Khurshid Ahmad was an expert driver. The bus was under the control of the U.P.S.R.T.C., but it was insured by the appellant-Insurance Company. So, the liability lies with the appellant-Insurance Company, who has taken the premium.? 7. The main dispute is regarding the quantum of the compensation. 8. In the instant case, the deceased was a Government Servant in the Department of Animal Husbandry, Sultanpur. He was drawing the salary of Rs.11,580/- per month. Out of it, 1/3rd was deducted for the personal expenditure. So, the balance amount of Rs.7,720/- was taken for the purpose of computation of the award. Thus, his total income comes to Rs.92,640/- per annum. The deceased was 45 years old, so, the multiple of 13 was rightly applied. Thus, compensation comes to Rs.92,640/- x 13 = 12,04,320/-. In addition, Rs.7,000/- was awarded for the consortium, funeral charges etc. Further, medical expenses were also awarded. Thus, the total compensation was awarded for Rs.12,18,378/- only. 9. By considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, it appears reasonable. Hence, the same is hereby sustained along with reasons mentioned therein. The claimants-respondents are also entitled to get interest from the date of filing of the claim petition before the Tribunal @ 6% per annum. In the instant case, the interest is given from the date of the accident, which is wrong. So, the impugned award is modified and it is provided that the interest will be paid from the date of filing of the claim petition before the Tribunal. 10. The registry of this Court is directed to transmit the amount/record, if any, deposited in this Court to the concerned Tribunal, within a period of one month, who is further directed to disburse the same within a period of three months thereafter, in terms of the award. Appellant-Insurance Company is also directed to deposit the full/remaining amount within the Tribunal, if not already deposited, within a period of one month. 11. In the result, the appeal filed by the appellant-Insurance Company is allowed partly. ___________