JUDGMENT : Mansoor Ahmad Mir, J. Subject matter of this appeal is the award, dated 30th September, 2013, passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Shimla, District Shimla, H.P. (for short, “the Tribunal”) in Claim Petition No.44-S/2 of 2009, titled Balak Ram and another vs. Gullu Transport Company and another, whereby compensation to the tune of Rs.6,32,000/-, alongwith interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till deposit, came to be awarded in favour of the claimants and the insurer was saddled with the liability, with the right of recovery, (for short the “impugned award”). 2. The claimants and the owner have not questioned the impugned award on any ground, thus, the same has attained finality so far as it relates to them. 3. Feeling aggrieved, the insurer has filed the instant appeal on the following counts: i. The Tribunal has wrongly saddled the insurer with the liability, with right of recovery; ii. The multiplier is on the higher side; iii. The deceased was a bachelor, therefore, 50% was to be deducted towards his personal expenses and the Tribunal has fallen into an error in deducting 1/3rd amount. 4. I have examined the pleadings and have gone through the impugned award. Admittedly, the deceased was bachelor and was a student of Engineering. It can be presumed that the deceased may have a bright future ahead. The Tribunal has fallen into an error in assessing the income of the deceased at Rs.4,500/- per month. Hypothetically and after exercising guess work, the income of the deceased can be said to be Rs.6,000/- per month. 5. Admittedly, the deceased, at the time of death, was a bachelor, therefore, in view of Sarla Verma (Smt.) and others versus Delhi Transport Corporation and another, reported in AIR 2009 SC 3104 and upheld by a larger Bench of the Apex Court in case titled as Reshma Kumari & others versus Madan Mohan and another, reported in 2013 AIR (SCW) 3120, 1/2 is to be deducted from the said income towards his personal expenses. Accordingly, it is held that the claimants have lost source of dependency to the tune of Rs.3,000/- per month. 6. The deceased was 22 years of age at the time of death. Accordingly, it is held that the claimants have lost source of dependency to the tune of Rs.3,000/- per month. 6. The deceased was 22 years of age at the time of death. Therefore, in view of Schedule II appended to the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 read with the judgment made by the Apex Court in Sarla Verma’s case supra, multiplier of ‘16’ is appropriate and is applied accordingly. 7. In view of the above, the claimants are awarded Rs.3,000/- x 12 x 16 = Rs.5,76,000/- under the head loss of source of dependency. In addition, the claimants are also awarded Rs.10,000/- each under the heads ‘loss of love and affection’, ‘loss of estate’ and ‘funeral expenses’. 8. Having regard to the above discussion, the claimants are held entitled to Rs.5,76,000/- + Rs.30,000/- = Rs.6,06,000/- as compensation. 9. As far as interest is concerned, the Tribunal has awarded interest at the rate of 9% per annum. It is beaten law of land that the rate of interest should be awarded as per the prevailing rates, in view of the judgments rendered by the Apex Court in cases titled as United India Insurance Co. Ltd. and others versus Patricia Jean Mahajan and others, reported in (2002) 6 SCC 281 ; Santosh Devi versus National Insurance Company Ltd. and others, reported in 2012 AIR SCW 2892; Amrit Bhanu Shali and others versus National Insurance Company Limited and others, reported in (2012) 11 SCC 738 ; Smt. Savita versus Binder Singh & others, reported in 2014 AIR SCW 2053; Kalpanaraj & Ors. versus Tamil Nadu State Transport Corpn., reported in 2014 AIR SCW 2982; Amresh Kumari versus Niranjan Lal Jagdish Pd. Jain and others, reported in (2015) 4 SCC 433 , and Mohinder Kaur and others versus Hira Nand Sindhi (Ghoriwala) and another, reported in (2015) 4 SCC 434 , and discussed by this Court in a batch of FAOs, FAO No. 256 of 2010, titled as Oriental Insurance Company versus Smt. Indiro and others, being the lead case, decided on 19.06.2015. 10. Having said so, it is held that the amount of compensation shall carry interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the deposit thereof. 11. 10. Having said so, it is held that the amount of compensation shall carry interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the deposit thereof. 11. The argument of the learned counsel for the appellant/insurer that the Tribunal has fallen into an error in saddling the insurer with the liability, with right or recovery, is devoid of any force for the simple reason that the vehicle was insured and the claimants were third party. The Tribunal has rightly saddled the insurer with the liability, with right of recovery. 12. In view of the above, the appeal is allowed and the impugned award is modified as indicated above. The Registry is directed to release the amount in favour of the claimants forthwith, and the excess amount, if any, be refunded to the insurer through payee’s account cheque.