JUDGMENT Hon’ble B.S. Verma, J. (Oral) 1. This appeal, U/S 173 of Motor Vehicle Act, is directed against the judgment and award dated 17.03.2010, passed by Addl. District Judge/3rd F.T.C./ M.A.C.T. Udham Singh Nagar, in M.A.C.T. Case No. 96 of 2008, whereby a sum of Rs. 1,67,500/- has been awarded to the claimants against opposite party no.3 the New India Insurance Company Ltd along with interest @ 7% per annum from the date of filing the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 2. The facts of the case, in short, are that on 26.1.2008 Suman and Neetu had gone to Kali Temple by a Cycle. Mor Pal was also with them. When at 1.00 p.m. they were returning to their home and were at bye-pass road near Sani Temple, truck No. U.P. 25-T-6816 came there in a rash and negligent manner and dashed with the cycle, due to which Suman fell down towards left side and Neetu was crushed by the truck and she died at the spot. 3. The claimants, parents of deceased Neetu filed the claim petition. The claim was contested by opposite party No.1 Muzaffar Ali Khan, opposite party No.2 Kaushar Khan, owner and driver of the truck and they alleged that the truck was insured with New India Insurance Company and the driver had valid driving license. 4. The opposite party No.3, the New India Insurance Company also filed its W.S. and alleged that the accident had occurred due to the negligence of truck driver and the insurance company is not liable to pay any compensation. 5. The learned tribunal framed issues in the claim petition and parties led evidence in support of their case. 6. The tribunal after hearing parties and considering the entire evidence on record partly allowed the claim petition against the insurance company 7. Feeling aggrieved, the claimants have preferred this appeal for enhancement. 8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 9. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants-claimants has submitted that the learned tribunal has committed a manifest error of law by assessing the dependency of the claimants upon the deceased. The tribunal has taken the notional income of the deceased as Rs. 36,000/- and after making ½ deduction towards living and personal expenses of the deceased, calculated the dependency as Rs. The tribunal has taken the notional income of the deceased as Rs. 36,000/- and after making ½ deduction towards living and personal expenses of the deceased, calculated the dependency as Rs. 18,000/- per annum, but at the same time the tribunal has taken a sum of Rs. 15,000/- as annual dependency in place of Rs. 18,000/-. 10. From a perusal of impugned award it reveals that the tribunal has taken the notional income of the deceased as Rs. 36,000/- per annum and after making a deduction of ½ towards personal and living expenses of the deceased calculated the same as Rs. 18,000/-, but relying on the judgment of Manju Devi vs. Musafir Paswan , reported in 2005 (1) T.A.C. 609 (S.C.), wherein the Apex Court on the death of a boy aged 13 years has assessed the notional income of Rs. 15,000/- per annum, has taken the annual dependency as Rs. 15,000/- in the case at hand. The tribunal also relied on another case F.A.F.O. 487 of 2007, National Insurance Company Ltd. vs. Indra Bahadur, decided by this court on 1.9.2008, wherein the compensation of Rs. 2,25,000/- was awarded on the death of a body aged 12 years. However, the facts of case at hand are different. In the case at hand the age of deceased Neetu was 15 years at the time of accident. Therefore, after making a deduction ½ towards living and personal expenses of the deceased from the notional income of Rs.36,000/-, the annual dependency, comes to Rs. 18,000/-. The age of father of the deceased has been shown as 43 years in the affidavit filed along with urgency application No. 2435/2013. The learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that the age of the deceased was 15 years. In view of law laid down by Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Sarla Verma Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation reported in AIR 2009, Supreme Court, 3104, where the deceased is bachelor and claimants are parents, the multiplier would be adopted on the age of claimants. Therefore, in view of Sarla Verma case (supra) the multiplier at the age of 15 years of deceased would be 15. In the case at hand the deceased was aged 15 years and a multiplier of 15 would apply. Therefore, after multiplying the annual dependency of Rs. 18,000/- to multiplier of 15, the dependency comes to Rs. 18,000/- X. 15= Rs.2,70,000/-. In the case at hand the deceased was aged 15 years and a multiplier of 15 would apply. Therefore, after multiplying the annual dependency of Rs. 18,000/- to multiplier of 15, the dependency comes to Rs. 18,000/- X. 15= Rs.2,70,000/-. The tribunal has recorded a categorical finding on issue No.3 that the deceased Neetu was sitting in the Cycle along with two other persons and when the truck collided with the cycle, the cyclist were also negligent as they were three in number riding in the cycle and the cycle might lose its balance and dashed with the truck and accordingly held the cyclist negligent upto 30% and for remaining 70% the driver of the offending truck was held liable. Therefore, the claimants would be entitled to get the compensation upto 70% from the insurance company which comes to Rs. 2,70,000/- X 70%= Rs.1,89,000/-. The tribunal also awarded a sum of Rs. 10,000/- towards funeral expenses, which is an exorbitant amount and is reduced to Rs. 5,000/- and after adding this amount in the awarded amount the total compensation payable by insurance company comes to Rs. 1,94,000/-. 11. For the discussion made above the claimants are entitled to get a sum of Rs. 1,94,000/- as compensation from the New India Insurance Company, along with interest @ 7% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment, instead of Rs. 1,67,500/- awarded by the tribunal. 12. With the above modification the appeal is partly allowed.