JUDGMENT : N.K. Mody, J. Ms. Anjali Jamkhedkar, counsel for appellants. Mr. T.C. Jain, counsel for respondent Nos. 1 and 2. Mr. C.P. Singh, counsel for respondent No. 3. 2. This order shall also govern the disposal of M.A. No. 1517/08 as both the appeals are arising out of award dated 25-1-2008 passed by MACT, Shajapur in claim case No. 16/07 whereby the claim petition filed by the appellants was allowed and compensation of Rs. 2,18,750/- was awarded on account of injuries sustained by the appellant in a, motor accident. 3. In the appeal filed by the claimants, the prayer is that amount be enhanced while in the appeal filed by respondent No. 3 the prayer is that since the offending vehicle was overloaded and deceased was sitting on the roof top of the vehicle, the appellant/ insurance company is not liable. 4. Short facts of the case are that claim, petition was filed by the appellants alleging, that on 3-3-2007 deceased Gopalsingh was travelling in a bus bearing registration No. CIU 0329 which was being driven by respondent No. 1 rashly and negligently, owned by respondent No. 2 and insured with respondent No. 3, Gopalsingh fell down and sustained head injuries. He was brought to civil hospital, Badod from where he was referred to District Hospital, Ujjain and thereafter was referred to Gokuldas hospital, Indore but ultimately he passed away on 11-3-2007. 5. Since the offending vehicle was insured, therefore it was prayed that claim petition, be allowed and compensation be awarded, The claim petition was contested by respondent No. 3 on the ground that since the deceased was travelling on the roof top of the bus, therefore deceased himself was negligent. It was also alleged that since the bus. was carrying passengers more than its capacity for which it was insured therefore also the respondent No. 3/insurance company, is not liable for compensation. After framing of issues and recording of evidence learned, Tribunal allowed the claim petition and. awarded a sum of Rs. 2,18,750/- holding, the appellant/insurance company liable, there; fore both the appeals are filed. 6. Learned counsel for appellant submits that deceased was hospitalised for a week and only a meager amount of Rs. 15,000/- has been awarded in this head. After framing of issues and recording of evidence learned, Tribunal allowed the claim petition and. awarded a sum of Rs. 2,18,750/- holding, the appellant/insurance company liable, there; fore both the appeals are filed. 6. Learned counsel for appellant submits that deceased was hospitalised for a week and only a meager amount of Rs. 15,000/- has been awarded in this head. It is submitted that income was assessed on notional basis and in other heads also the amount awarded is on lower side, hence prayed that appeal be allowed and amount be enhanced. 7. Learned counsel for respondent No. 3 submits that since deceased himself was negligent, therefore learned Tribunal was not justified in holding the appellant/insurance company liable for compensation. It is submitted that since offending vehicle was carrying the passengers more than its capacity as it was found that 75 persons were travelling, therefore also learned Tribunal committed error in holding the respondent No. 3/insurance company liable for compensation. It is submitted that appeal filed by the respondent No. 3 be allowed and appeal filed by the appellants/claimants be dismissed. 8. From perusal of record it appears that income was assessed on notional basis which appears to be on lower side. Since accident is of the year 2007 and deceased was resident of remote village of Shajapur, therefore income ought to have been assessed @ Rs. 2,500/- per month. Deduction towards personal expenses ought to have been the and multiplier of 17 ought to have been applied. In view of this, appellants are entitled for the following amount : towards loss of dependency Rs. 3,82,750/- towards funeral expenses Rs. 5,000/- towards loss of estate Rs. 5,000/- towards loss of consortium Rs. 5,000/- towards loss of love and affection Rs. 25,000/- towards pecuniary losses Rs. 25,000/- Total Rs. 4,47,750/- 9. Thus appellants are entitled for a sum of Rs. 4,22,750/- instead of Rs. 2,18,750/-. Thus the amount is enhanced by a sum of Rs. 2,29,000/- which shall carry interest @ 8% per annum from the date of application. It is further directed that learned Tribunal shall deposit 80% of the awarded amount on long term fixed deposit in the name of appellant No. 3 with the condition that the bank will not permit any loan or advance. 2,29,000/- which shall carry interest @ 8% per annum from the date of application. It is further directed that learned Tribunal shall deposit 80% of the awarded amount on long term fixed deposit in the name of appellant No. 3 with the condition that the bank will not permit any loan or advance. Interest on the said amount shall be credited on monthly basis in S.B. Account of appellant No. 3 from where the amount can be withdrawn as per needs. However, on an application by the appellant No. 3, this condition could be modified by the learned Tribunal in exceptional circumstances, if made out by appellant No. 3. 10. So far as appeal filed by the respondent No. 3 is concerned, since the claim petition is filed by the dependents of the deceased, therefore even if the offending vehicle was carrying passengers more from its capacity, then too, respondent No. 3 cannot be permitted to avoid its liability. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the appeal filed by the appellants is allowed and appeal filed by the respondent No. 3 stands dismissed. 11. Copy of the order be placed in the record of M.A. No. 1517/2008. Order accordingly.