JUDGMENT : Mansoor Ahmad Mir, J. This appeal is directed against the judgment and award dated 1.10.2008, made by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-1 Kangra at Dharamshala, H.P. in MACT Petition No. 24-N/II/2005, titled Parkash Chand and another versus Shri Surinder Singh and others, for short “the Tribunal”, whereby compensation to the tune of Rs.2,75,000/- was awarded in favour of the claimants, hereinafter referred to as “the impugned award”, for short. 2. Owner, insurer and driver have not questioned the impugned award on any ground, thus it has attained finality so far it relates to them. 3. The claimants have questioned the impugned award on the ground of adequacy of compensation. 4. Thus, the only issue to be determined in this appeal is whether the amount awarded is adequate or otherwise. 5. It appears that the amount awarded is too meager and the Tribunal has fallen in an error in assessing the compensation for the following reasons. 6. It was averred in the claim petition that the deceased, namely, Kuldeep Singh was 23 years of age at the time of the accident but the Tribunal has held his age as 24 years which is not in dispute. Accordingly, it is held that the age of the deceased was 24 years at the time of the accident. The deceased was a government employee, drawing Rs.6809/- per month as salary, as is evident from Ext. PW5/A, which can roughly be taken as Rs.7000/- per month. 7. The apex Court has laid down the principles and test how to make deductions in case Sarla Verma and others versus Delhi Transport Corporation and another reported in AIR 2009 SC 3104 and upheld in Reshma Kumari and others versus Madan Mohan and another, reported in 2013 AIR SCW 3120. 8. The deceased was a bachelor and one half was to be deducted in view of the ratio laid down in the judgment supra. Thus, it is accordingly held that the claimants have lost source of dependency to the tune of Rs.3500/- per month. 9. The claimants have given their age as 45 and 42 respectively, in the claim petition. Thus, multiplier applicable, as per Sarla verma and Reshma Kumar’s cases, supra is “13”. 10. Having said so, claimants are entitled to compensation to the tune of Rs.3500x12x13= Rs.5,46,000/- with interest @7.5% per annum from the date of impugned award till its realization. 9. The claimants have given their age as 45 and 42 respectively, in the claim petition. Thus, multiplier applicable, as per Sarla verma and Reshma Kumar’s cases, supra is “13”. 10. Having said so, claimants are entitled to compensation to the tune of Rs.3500x12x13= Rs.5,46,000/- with interest @7.5% per annum from the date of impugned award till its realization. The claimants are also held entitled to Rs.10,000/- each under the heads, i.e., “loss of funeral expenses” “loss of estate”, “loss of consortium” and loss of love and affection”. Total Rs.40,000/-. 11. Viewed thus, it is held that the claimants are entitled to compensation to the tune of Rs.5,46,000+Rs.40,000/-. Total Rs.5,86,000/- with interest @ 7.5% per annum as awarded. The interest on the enhanced amount is payable from the date of the impugned award. 12. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed. The compensation is enhanced and the impugned award is modified as indicated hereinabove. 13. The insurer is directed to deposit the enhanced amount within six weeks from today in the Registry. 14. Registry is directed to release the amount, on deposit by the insurer, in favour of the claimants, strictly, as per the terms and conditions contained in the impugned award, through payee’s cheque account. 15. Send down the record, forthwith, after placing a copy of this judgment.