JUDGMENT : Mansoor Ahmad Mir, J. Challenge in this appeal is to the award dated 22nd October, 2008, made by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bilaspur, H.P. (hereinafter referred to as “the Tribunal”) in M.A.C. Petition No. 44 of 2006, titled Vidya Devi & another versus Smt. Kamla Gandhi & others, whereby compensation to the tune of Rs. 2,13,000/- with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till its realization, was awarded in favour of the claimants-appellants herein and against the insurer-respondent No. 3 herein (for short, “the impugned award”). 2. The insurer, insured-owner and driver have not questioned the impugned award, on any count. 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. Heard. Perused. 5. The amount awarded is meager for the following reasons. 6. Admittedly, the deceased was 21 years of age at the time of accident and was a bachelor. The Tribunal has fallen in an error in applying the multiplier of ‘7’. The multiplier of ‘15’ is applicable in this case, as per the 2nd Schedule appended to the Motor Vehicles Act read with the ratio laid down by the Apex Court in Sarla Verma (Smt.) and others versus Delhi Transport Corporation and another another, reported in AIR 2009 SC 3104 , upheld by a larger Bench of the Apex Court in a case titled as Reshma Kumari & others versus Madan Mohan and another, reported in 2013 AIR (SCW) 3120 read with the judgment rendered by the Apex Court in case titled as Munna Lal Jain & another versus Vipin Kumar Sharma & others, reported in 2015 AIR SCW 3105. 7. The Tribunal has taken the income of the deceased as Rs. 3,000/- per month. The claimants have pleaded that the deceased was earning Rs. 4,000/- per month, as a conductor and Rs. 10,000/- from other vocations. It can be safely held, rather admitted, that the monthly income of the deceased was not less than Rs. 4,000/. After deducting one-half towards the personal expenses of the deceased, while keeping in view the ratio laid down by the Apex Court in Sarla Verma’s, Reshma Kumari’s and Munna Lal Jain’s, cases, supra, the claimants are held entitled to the tune of Rs. 2,000/- x 12 = Rs. 4,000/. After deducting one-half towards the personal expenses of the deceased, while keeping in view the ratio laid down by the Apex Court in Sarla Verma’s, Reshma Kumari’s and Munna Lal Jain’s, cases, supra, the claimants are held entitled to the tune of Rs. 2,000/- x 12 = Rs. 24,000 x 15 = Rs. 3,60,000/- under the head ‘loss of dependency’. 8. The Tribunal has not awarded compensation under the heads ‘loss of estate’ and ‘funeral expenses’. Keeping in view the recent judgments of the Apex Court, a sum of Rs. 10,000/- each, is also awarded under the heads, ‘funeral expenses’, loss of estate’ and ‘loss of love and affection’ in favour of the claimants, i.e. Rs. 30,000/-. 9. The Tribunal has rightly awarded Rs. 15,000/-, under the heads, ‘attendant charges and special diet’ and Rs. 10,000/- under the head ‘travelling expenses’ are maintained. 10. Having said so, it is held that the claimants are entitled to compensation to the tune of Rs. 3,60,000/- + Rs. 10,000/- + Rs. 10,000/- + Rs. 10,000/- + Rs. 15,000/- + Rs. 10,000/, total amounting to Rs. 4,15,000/- with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till realization. 11. The amount of compensation is enhanced and the impugned award is modified, as indicated above. The appeal is accordingly disposed of. 12. The insurer is directed to deposit the enhanced amount alongwith interest, within a period of eight weeks from today before the Registry. On deposit, the Registry is directed to release the entire amount in favour of the claimants, strictly in terms of conditions contained in the impugned award, through payees account cheque or by depositing in the account. 13. Send down the records after placing a copy of the judgment on the Tribunal's file.