JUDGMENT : M.R. Shah, J. As both these appeals arise out of the impugned judgment and award passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal and as such they can be said to be Cross Appeals both these appeals are decided and disposed of by this common judgment and order. 2. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and award passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Auxiliary), Valsad (hereinafter referred to as 'the tribunal') in M.A.C.P. No.1789/2002 by which the learned tribunal has partly allowed the said Claim Petition and has awarded a total sum of Rs. 12,46,000/- of compensation under different heads to the original claimants for the death of the deceased-Mumtaz A. Thakkar, the appellants-original claimants have preferred First Appeal No.2665/2008 to enhance the amount of compensation awarded by the learned tribunal. 3. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the aforesaid impugned judgment and award passed by the learned tribunal, original opponent no.2-National Insurance Company Ltd.-insurer of the autorikshaw involved in the accident has preferred First Appeal No.2682/2009. 4. In a vehicular accident, which took place on 07/10/2000 at about 6:30 p.m. the deceased, who was a pedestrian at Morarji Circle Road, Opp Lakshmi Bhojnalay, died. The autorikshaw, bearing No. GJ- 15-Y-1622, which at the relevant time, was being driven by original opponent no.1 dashed the deceased, who was a pedestrian. He tried to apply break but the break of the autorikshaw failed and, therefore, the deceased sustained serious fatal injuries. The original claimants therefore filed Claim Petition No.1789/2002 claiming a total sum of Page 2 of 10 HC-NIC Page 2 of 10 Created On Fri Aug 21 13:30:18 IST 2015 C/FA/2665/2008 JUDGMENT Rs. 30 lakhs towards compensation under different heads. It was the case on behalf of the original claimants that the driver of the autorikshaw involved in the accident was sole negligent for the accident. It was also the case on behalf of the original claimants that the deceased at the relevant time was aged 42 years and was serving as an Officer/Assistant in the Development Credit Bank Ltd and her salary/income at the time of the accident was Rs. 13,868/- per month and, therefore, the original claimants claimed a total sum of Rs. 30 lakhs towards compensation for the death of the deceased under different heads. 4.1. 13,868/- per month and, therefore, the original claimants claimed a total sum of Rs. 30 lakhs towards compensation for the death of the deceased under different heads. 4.1. The Claim Petition was opposed by the appellant-Insurance Company-original opponent no.2 by filing the written statement at Exh.40 denying all the averments made in the Claim Petition. It was also the case on behalf of the Insurance Company that the accident occurred because of the negligence on the part of the deceased and, therefore, it was requested to dismiss the Claim Petition. On the basis of the pleadings in the Claim Petition as well as the written statement, the learned tribunal framed the issues at Exh.14. The original claimants led the following, oral as well as documentary evidences; (i) Shri Ashokbhai Kanjibhai Thakkar-original claimant no.1- Exh.26 (ii) Shri Kherunisha Aamir Dodiya-Officer of the Bank-Exh.32 Documentary evidences (i) copy of the FIR-Exh.19 (ii) panchnama of the place of the accident-Exh.20 (iii) copy of the inquest panchnama - Exh.21 (iv) School leaving certificate of the deceased-Exh.22 (v) Post Mortem report-Exh.23 (vi) copy of the chargesheet filed against the driver of the auto rickshaw-Exh.24 (vii) Pay slip of September, 2000 of the deceased, Exh.36 Original opponent no.2-Insurance Company did not deal any evidence. 4.2. On appreciation of evidence, both oral as well as documentary, more particularly, copy of the FIR, panchnama of the place of the accident, the learned tribunal has held the driver of the autorikshaw original opponent no.1 sole negligent for the accident. On appreciation of evidence, the learned tribunal considered the net salary of the deceased at the time of the accident at Rs. 10,770/- per month. However, considering the net salary at Rs. 10,200/- per month and thereafter deducting ?rd towards the personal expenses of the deceased, the learned tribunal has considered the loss of dependency at Rs. 8600/- per month and applying the multiplier of 15, the learned tribunal by the impugned judgment and award has awarded Rs. 12,24,000/- towards the future economic loss to the original claimants and has awarded a further sum of Rs. 22,000/- under the heads of loss of estate, loss of love and affection, loss of consortium and funeral expenses. Thus, by impugned judgment and award, the learned tribunal has awarded a total sum of Rs. 12,24,000/- towards the future economic loss to the original claimants and has awarded a further sum of Rs. 22,000/- under the heads of loss of estate, loss of love and affection, loss of consortium and funeral expenses. Thus, by impugned judgment and award, the learned tribunal has awarded a total sum of Rs. 12,46,000/- to the original claimants with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of the application till realization. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and award both the original claimants as well as opponent no.2- Insurance Company have preferred the present First Appeals. 5. Shri Amit Patel, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the original claimants has vehemently submitted that the learned tribunal has materially erred in considering the net salary of the deceased at the time of the accident at Rs. 10,770/- per month. It is further submitted by Shri Patel, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the original claimants that the learned tribunal has materially erred in deducted Rs. 3098/- while considering the net salary of the deceased. It is submitted that the deduction of Rs. 1178/- was towards Provident Fund contribution and Rs. 1170/- was towards festival advance. It is submitted that the learned tribunal has materially erred in deducting Rs. 3098/- while considering the net salary of the deceased. It is submitted that therefore the learned tribunal ought to have considered the net salary of the deceased at Rs. 13,868/- and thereby ought to have awarded future economic loss considering the salary/income of the deceased at the time of the accident at Rs. 13,868/- per month. It is further submitted by Shri Patel, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the original claimants that the learned tribunal has materially erred in awarding Rs. 10,000/- only towards loss of estate, Rs. 5,000/- only towards loss of love and affection and Rs. 5,000/- only towards loss of consortium. It is submitted that the learned tribunal ought to have awarded at least Rs. 1 lakh in all towards loss of estate, loss of love and affection and loss of consortium. 5.1. It is further submitted by Shri Patel, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the original claimants that while awarding future economic loss/loss of dependency, the learned tribunal has not considered the future rise in income. 1 lakh in all towards loss of estate, loss of love and affection and loss of consortium. 5.1. It is further submitted by Shri Patel, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the original claimants that while awarding future economic loss/loss of dependency, the learned tribunal has not considered the future rise in income. It is submitted that as per the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sarla Verma (Smt) and Ors. (Supra) 30% of the actual salary/income is required to be added.Making the above submissions, it is requested to allow First Appeal No.2665/2008 preferred by the original claimants. 6. On the other hand, Ms. Bhaya, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the Insurance Company-appellant of First Appeal No.2682/2009 has vehemently submitted that the learned tribunal has as such materially erred in considering the net salary of the deceased a the time of the accident at Rs. 10,200/- per month. It is further submitted by Ms. Bhaya, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the Insurance Company that as the deceased at the time of the accident was aged 42 years 4 months as per the decision in the case of Sarla Verma (Smt) and Ors. v. Delhi Transport Corporation & Anr reported in (2009) 6 SCC 121 the learned tribunal ought to have applied the multiplier of 14 instead of applying the multiplier of 15. Ms. Bhaya, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the Insurance Company has further submitted that as such the learned tribunal ought to have dismissed the Claim Petition against the Insurance Company as the driver of the autorikshaw was not having a valid, effective and legal driving license to drive the commercial vehicle. No other submissions have been made. Making the above submissions, it is requested to allow First Appeal No.2682/2009 and dismiss First Appeal No.2665/2008 preferred by the original claimants. 7. Heard the learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties at length and perused the impugned judgment and award passed by the learned tribunal and we have re-appreciated the entire evidence on record from the Record and Proceedings received from the learned tribunal and as such from the paper book, which is on record. 7.1. At the outset, it is required to be noted that on appreciation of evidence, the learned tribunal has held the original opponent no.1- driver of the autorikshaw involved in the accident sole negligent. 7.1. At the outset, it is required to be noted that on appreciation of evidence, the learned tribunal has held the original opponent no.1- driver of the autorikshaw involved in the accident sole negligent. The aforesaid finding of the learned tribunal has not been challenged by original opponent no.2-Insurance Company. By the impugned judgment and award, the learned tribunal has awarded a total sum of Rs. 12,46,000/- to the original claimants with 7.5% interest thereon as different heads; towards future economic loss Rs. 12,24,000/- towards loss of estate Rs. 10,000/- towards loss of love and affection Rs. 5,000/- towards loss of consortium Rs. 5,000/- towards funeral expenses Rs. 2,000/- Rs. 12,46,000/- 7.2. Now so far as the amount of Rs. 12,24,000/- awarded by the learned tribunal under the head of future economic loss is concerned, it appears from the impugned judgment and award that the learned tribunal has considered the net salary of the deceased at Rs. 10,770/- per month. However, ultimately has considered the net salary at Rs. 10,200/- per month (rounded off). However, it is required to be noted that as per the salary slip produced at Exh.35, the salary of the deceased at the time of the accident was Rs. 13,868/- including other perks and allowances and Rs. 3089/- was deducted towards Provident Fund contribution of the deceased and the festival advance. While considering the net salary of the deceased, the Provident Fund contribution and the festival advance are not required to be deducted and the same are required to be included in the net salary of the deceased. However, at the same time, certain allowances like conveyance allowance and duty allowance are not required to be included while considering the net salary of the deceased and considering the aforesaid, the net salary of the deceased was required to be considered at Rs. 12,872/- per month and deducting 10% towards the Income Tax, being the minimum, the loss of dependency would come to Rs. 11,585/- per month and after rounding it it would come to Rs. 11,685/- per month and and after deducting ?rd towards the personal expenses of the deceased the loss of dependency would come to Rs. 7734/- per month and adding 30% towards the future rise in income it would come to Rs. 11,585/- per month and after rounding it it would come to Rs. 11,685/- per month and and after deducting ?rd towards the personal expenses of the deceased the loss of dependency would come to Rs. 7734/- per month and adding 30% towards the future rise in income it would come to Rs. 10,054/- and as the deceased was aged 42 years and 4 months as per the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sarla Verma (Smt) and Ors v. Delhi Transport Corporation & Anr reported in (2009) 6 SCC 121 multiplier of 14 is required to be applied. Under the circumstances, the future economic loss/loss of dependency would come to Rs. 16,89,072/- instead of Rs. 12,24,000/- as determined and awarded by the learned tribunal. 7.3. Similarly, the learned tribunal has materially erred in awarding only Rs. 10,000/- towards loss of estate, Rs. 5,000/- towards loss of love and affection and Rs. 5,000/- towards loss of consortium. Considering the decision of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of National Insurance Co. v. Gordhanbhai Damjibhai Makum rendered in First Appeal No.3894/2006 the original claimants shall be entitled to a total sum of Rs. 1 lakh towards the loss of estate, loss of love and affection and loss of consortium. The learned tribunal has materially erred in awarding the interest at the relevant time at 7.5% per annum. Considering the fact that the accident took place in the year 2000 and considering the rate of interest prevailing at the relevant time the original claimants shall be entitled to the interest at the rate of 9% from the date of the application till realization. Under the circumstances, the original claimants shall be entitled to Rs. 17,91,072/- under different heads; towards future economic loss Rs . 16,89,072/- towards loss of estate, love and affection and loss of consortium Rs . 1,00,000/- towards funeral expenses Rs . 2,000/- Rs . 17,91,072/- 7.4. Now so far as the contention on behalf of the appellant-original opponent no.2-Insurance Company raised in the appeal memo that as the autorikshaw was not having a valid and legal driving license to drive the commercial vehicle is concerned, at the outset, it is required to be noted that no such contention was raised before the learned tribunal. Even the learned tribunal had not framed the issue on the aforesaid. Even the learned tribunal had not framed the issue on the aforesaid. The aforesaid being the question of fact for which the evidence is required to be led, the appellant-Insurance Company cannot be permitted to raise the said issue for the first time before this Court. 7.5. In view of the above and for the reasons stated hereinabove, First Appeal No.2665/2008 preferred by the original claimants is hereby partly allowed. The impugned judgment and award passed by the learned tribunal in M.A.C.P. No.1789/2002 is hereby modified to the extent it is held that the original claimants shall be entitled to Rs. 17,91,072/- with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of the application till realisation from the original opponents. Consequently, First Appeal No. 2682/2009 preferred by the Insurance Company is hereby dismissed. No order as to costs. Order accordingly.