JUDGMENT : - Mansoor Ahmad Mir, Chief Justice (Oral) A common judgment and award dated 18.1.2012 in MAC Petition No. 11-S/2 of 2010, passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal Shimla in three claim petitions has given birth to these appeals, hereinafter referred to as “the impugned award”, for short, on the grounds taken in the memo of appeals. 2. The respondent has not questioned the impugned award on any ground. 3. The claimants in all the three claim petitions have questioned the impugned award on the ground of adequacy of compensation and also that the Tribunal has fallen in error in not awarding interest. The question in these appeals is whether the Tribunal has rightly assessed the compensation or otherwise. Thus, I deem it proper not to discuss other issues as the findings on the said issues have attained finality. 4. I have examined the record relating to FAO No. 178 of 2012 and also the record of FAO No. 249 of 2012. The Tribunal has rightly assessed the compensation but has fallen in error in not awarding the interest in both the cases. As per the mandate of Section 171 of the Motor Vehicles Act, for short “the Act, claimants are also entitled to interest. The interest was to be granted. It is apt to reproduce Section 171 of the Act herein: “171. Award of interest where any claim is allowed. Where any Claims Tribunal allows a claim for compensation made under this Act, such Tribunal may direct that in addition to the amount of compensation simple interest shall also be paid at such rate and from such date not earlier than the date of making the claim as it may specify in this behalf.” 5. The word “shall” has been used in this Section, thus, interest was mandatory to be granted for the simple reasons that a sum of Rs.5,76,000/- was awarded in FAO No. 178 of 2012 and Rs.1,50,000/- was awarded in FAO No. 249 of 2012 in favour of the claimants on account of death of the deceased. Therefore, I deem it proper to award interest @ Rs.9% per annum in both the claim petitions. It is held that the claimants are entitled to interest @ Rs.9% per annum from the date of filing the claim petition till the final realization of the amount. Therefore, I deem it proper to award interest @ Rs.9% per annum in both the claim petitions. It is held that the claimants are entitled to interest @ Rs.9% per annum from the date of filing the claim petition till the final realization of the amount. The impugned award is modified as indicated above in both these appeals. 6. Now coming to FAO No. 248 of 2012. The Tribunal has assessed the compensation while taking monthly salary of the deceased as Rs.12,008/ and after deducting 1/3rd held that the claimants have lost source of income to the tune of Rs.8,000x12 = Rs.96,000/-, which is legally correct while keeping in view the mandate of Section 166 of the Act read with Sarla Verma versus Delhi Road Transport Corporation reported in AIR 2009 SC 3104 and upheld in Reshma Kumari and others versus Madan Mohan and anr. 2013 AIR (SCW) 3120. However, the Tribunal has fallen in error in applying the multiplier of “10” as per the Schedule appended to the Act read with the judgments (supra). The multiplier of “13” was just and appropriate multiplier applicable. The interest @ 9 % per annum was to be awarded from the date of claim petition till its realization, as discussed herein above. 7. Mr. Neeraj Gupta, Advocate, for the appellants has argued that Tribunal has not assessed the income correctly, which is devoid of any force, in view of the discussion made herein above. 8. Thus, the claimants are held entitled to Rs.8000x12x13 total to the tune of Rs.12, 48,000/- with 9% interest from the date of filing the claim petition till its realization. 9. The impugned award is modified and the amount is enhanced in this appeal, as indicated above. 10. All the three appeals are disposed of accordingly. Send down the record, forthwith.