JUDGMENT : Mansoor Ahmad Mir, J. This appeal is directed against the judgment and award dated 21.11.2008, made by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-I Solan, District Solan, H.P. in Petition No. 6-S/2 of 2007, titled Smt. Champa and others versus Shri Vinod Kumar Sharma and others, for short “the Tribunal”, whereby compensation to the tune of Rs.3,66,000/- alongwith interest @ 7.5% per annum was awarded in favour of the claimants, hereinafter referred to as “the impugned award”, for short. 2. Insurer, owner 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 that the Tribunal has fallen in an error in assessing the compensation. The learned counsel for the appellants argued that the age of the deceased was 24 years at the time of the accident, which is duly pleaded in the claim petition and is duly supported by the documents, i.e., postmortem report on the file, but without any basis, the Tribunal has recorded the age of deceased as 30 years in para 15 of the impugned award. 4. I have gone through the impugned award. I wonder how the Tribunal has come to the conclusion that the age of the deceased was 30 years. At this stage, Mr. J.S. Bagga, learned counsel for respondent No. 3 made available a copy of matriculation certificate of the deceased, across the Board, made part of the file. The date of birth of deceased is recorded as 8.10.1982 in the said certificate. Meaning thereby he was 25 years of age at the time of the accident. 5. Keeping in view the age of the deceased read with Munna Lal Jain and another versus Vipin Kumar Sharma and others reported in 2015 AIR SCW 3105, the multiplier is to be applied according to the age of the deceased. The multiplier of “16’ was applicable, keeping in view 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, but the Tribunal has applied the multiplier of “14”. Thus multiplier of “16” is applied in this case. Thus, the claimants have lost source of dependency to the tune of Rs.2000x12x16= Rs.3,84,000/-. 6. Thus multiplier of “16” is applied in this case. Thus, the claimants have lost source of dependency to the tune of Rs.2000x12x16= Rs.3,84,000/-. 6. The amount of Rs.30,000/- awarded by the Tribunal on other heads is maintained. 7. Thus, in all, the claimants are held entitled to Rs.3,84,000+Rs.30,000= Rs.4,14,000/-, with interest as awarded by the Tribunal. 8. Having said so, the impugned award is modified as indicated hereinabove. 9. The insurer is directed to deposit the amount, if not already deposited, including the enhanced amount, in this Registry within six weeks from today. The Registry, on deposit of the amount, is directed to release the same in favour of the claimants, strictly in terms of the conditions contained in the impugned award, through payees cheque account. 10. The appeal stands disposed of accordingly. 11. Send down the record forthwith, after placing a copy of this judgment.