JUDGMENT : G.P. Mittal, J. (Oral):-- 1. The appeal is for enhancement of compensation of Rs. 4,00,000/- awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (the Claims Tribunal) in favour of the Appellants for the death of Janardan Kumar Singh, who suffered fatal injuries in a motor vehicular accident which occurred on 16.11.2001. 2. In the absence of any appeal by the driver, owner or the insurer, the finding on negligence has attained finality. 3. During enquiry, the Claims Tribunal found that the accident was caused on account of rash and negligent driving of truck bearing registration No. DL-1LB-6031 driven by Respondent No. 1. 4. Further, on appreciation of evidence, the Claims Tribunal found that the deceased was getting a salary of Rs. 10,000/- per month including Rs. 1,000/- towards conveyance charges. 5. The Claims Tribunal deducted Rs. 1,000/- paid towards conveyance charges from the salary of the deceased and deducted 1/3rd towards personal and living expenses and applied a multiplier of 5 as per the age of the father of the deceased to compute the loss of dependency as Rs. 3,60,000/-. 6. Further, the Claims Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 40,000/- towards non-pecuniary damages to compute the overall compensation of Rs. 4,00,000/-. 7. The following contentions are raised on behalf of the Appellants:- (i) The income of the deceased ought to have been accepted as Rs. 10,000/- per month for computing the loss of dependency; (ii) The age of the mother of the deceased as per the voter identity card on the date of accident (16.11.2001) was 54 years and the appropriate multiplier on this age will be 11 as against 5 taken by the Claims Tribunal; (iii) The deceased had bright future prospects, addition of 50% ought to have been made for computing loss of dependency; and (iv) The compensation awarded towards non-pecuniary damages is on the lower side. 8. The learned counsel for the Respondent Insurance Company, however, submits that the compensation awarded is just and reasonable and does not call for any interference. 9. The Appellants have placed on record the salary certificate Ex.PW-1/4 which was proved by PW-2 Babu Lal Meerwal, Proprietor of M/s. Meerwal Construction Company. From the evidence of PW-2, it can be gathered that conveyance allowance was being paid to the deceased as part of his salary only for reporting for duty. Since Rs. 9. The Appellants have placed on record the salary certificate Ex.PW-1/4 which was proved by PW-2 Babu Lal Meerwal, Proprietor of M/s. Meerwal Construction Company. From the evidence of PW-2, it can be gathered that conveyance allowance was being paid to the deceased as part of his salary only for reporting for duty. Since Rs. 1,000/- was part of the salary, I will take entire income of the deceased to compute the loss of dependency. 10. As far as multiplier is concerned, as per the voter identity card available on the Trial Court record, the age of the mother of the deceased was 54 years on the date of the unfortunate accident. Therefore, the appropriate multiplier will be 11 as against 5 adopted by the Claims Tribunal. 11. In case of a bachelor, unless siblings are also dependent, deduction of 50% ought to have been made towards personal and living expenses. 12. The learned counsel for the Appellants submits that since the deceased had good future prospects, addition of 50% ought to have been made to compute the loss of dependency. I have perused the testimony of PW-2. Deceased Janardhan Kumar Singh had joined PW-2 Babu Lal Meerwal just 1½ months prior to his death. Of course, PW-2 spoke high of him. The Trial Court also reveals that before his employment with PW-2, deceased was working with Upkar Construction (Engineers & Developers) where the deceased was getting a salary of Rs. 8,000/- per month. Thus, it is established that the deceased was an experienced Site Engineer. PW-2 was also satisfied with his work and conduct and stated that if the deceased would have been alive, he would have been paid at least Rs. 12,000/- to Rs. 13,000/- per month as of now. Since the deceased was getting consistent hikes in his salary, in my view, the Appellants ought to have been granted addition of 50% towards future prospects. 13. The loss of dependency thus, comes to Rs. 8,82,750/- (10,000/- x 12 – Rs. 13,000/- (income tax) + 50% x 1/2 x 11). 14. As far as award towards non-pecuniary damages is concerned, it is now settled that the legal representatives are entitled to a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- each towards loss of love and affection and loss of consortium, Rs. 25,000/- towards funeral expenses and Rs. 8,82,750/- (10,000/- x 12 – Rs. 13,000/- (income tax) + 50% x 1/2 x 11). 14. As far as award towards non-pecuniary damages is concerned, it is now settled that the legal representatives are entitled to a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- each towards loss of love and affection and loss of consortium, Rs. 25,000/- towards funeral expenses and Rs. 10,000/- towards loss to estate in view of the three Judge Bench decision of the Supreme Court in Rajesh & Ors. v. Rajbir Singh & Ors., (2013) 9 SCC 54 . 15. In the instant case, since the deceased was a bachelor, therefore, the Appellants would be entitled to a total sum of Rs. 1,35,000/- towards non-pecuniary damages. 16. The overall compensation hence, comes to Rs. 10,17,750/-. 17. Thus, the compensation is enhanced by Rs. 6,17,750/- which shall carry interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the Claim Petition till its payment. 18. The enhanced compensation along with interest @ 7.5% per annum shall be deposited by Insurance Company within a period of four weeks in UCO Bank, Delhi High Court Branch, New Delhi. 19. 50% of the enhanced compensation along with interest shall be held in fixed deposit for a period of one year. Rest 50% along with interest shall be released to the Appellants on deposit. 20. The appeal is allowed in above terms. 21. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. 22. Dasti to the counsel for the parties.