JUDGMENT Hon’ble B.S. Verma, J. This appeal, preferred under section 173 of Motor Vehicle Act, 1988, is directed against the judgment and award dated 18.12.2007, passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, in Motor Accident Claim Case No. 09 of 2007, Sudama Ram & others vs. Sunder Lal Badoni & others, whereby the tribunal has awarded Rs. 4,08,000/- as amount of compensation to the claimants. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties, and perused the lower court record. 3. Brief facts of the case, are that Budhi Lal (aged 22 years) son of the claimants was helper in the truck bearing registration no. U.A. 10 4748. On 01.08.2006, at about 17:30 hrs., in Uttarkashi Rishikesh by pass road, when the truck reached Nalupani, the truck got uncontrolled due to negligence and rash driving of the driver and fell in the gorge due to which Budhi Lal died on the spot. Budhi Lal (deceased) was the only earning member in his family and earned Rs. 3,000/- per month. The claimants claimed compensation amounting Rs. 18,02,000/- . 4. The owner of the vehicle and appellant insurance company contested the claim petition, and filed their separate written statements. The owner of the vehicle pleaded that on the day of the incident, the truck was insured with appellant insurance company. It is further pleaded that vehicle was being driven by the driver with a valid license. The appellant insurance company pleaded that the vehicle was driven by its driver in violation of the terms of the insurance policy. 5. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the tribunal framed following issues: (i) Whether on 01.08.2006, at about 17:30 hrs., the truck bearing registration no. UA10/4748 in which Budhi Lal (deceased) was working as a helper, due to negligence and rash driving of the truck driver at Uttarkashi Rishikesh by pass road, in Nalupani met with an accident and fell in the gorge, in which Budhi Lal died on the spot? (ii) Whether on the day of the incident the vehicle was insured with the New India Assurance Company and the driver of the vehicle have not valid license to drive the vehicle and the driver of the vehicle have not carried valid permit, registration certificate, fitness etc., and the vehicle was being driven in violation of the terms of the policy, as stated by New India Assurance Company in its written statement? (iii) To what relief, if any, the claimants are entitled and if so from whom? 6. The tribunal recorded oral evidence of the parties and also perused the documents, and after hearing the parties decided all the issues in favour of the claimants and awarded Rs. 04,08,000/- as compensation to them. The tribunal directed that the amount of compensation shall be paid by the New India Assurance Company with whom vehicle (truck) was insured. Aggrieved by said order dated 18.12.2007, this appeal is preferred by the New India Assurance Company. 7. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the tribunal has arbitrarily assessed compensation @ Rs. 4,08,000/-. I have gone through the impugned award, and also evidence on record. The tribunal has specifically observed that premium Rs. 75/- has been paid to the insurance company on account of W.C. Employee 3 and the deceased was covered under the insurance policy. In the circumstances, this Court is of the view that the tribunal has rightly assessed notional income of the claimant @ Rs. 24,000/- per annum. So far as multiplier is concerned, considering the age of the deceased, in the light of principle of law laid down by the Apex Court in Sarla Verma vs. Delhi Transport Corporation (2009) 6 SCC page 121, the tribunal has rightly applied multiplier of seventeen. 8. I find no illegality in the impugned award. The appeal lacks merits and is dismissed. The amount so deposited with the Registry of this Court shall be remitted to M.A.C.T. concerned for being paid as directed by the tribunal in its order.