JUDGMENT : Mansoor Ahmad Mir, J. Challenge in this appeal is to judgment and award, dated 18th March, 2011, made by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Solan, Camp at Nalagarh (for short “the Tribunal”) in MAC Petition No. 18NL/2 of 2009, titled as Smt. Kamlesh Kaur and others versus Shri Rajinder Kumar and others, whereby compensation to the tune of 17,05,000/- with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of the petition till its realization came to be awarded in favour of the claimants and the insurer was saddled with liability (for short “the impugned award”). 2. The insurer, driver and owner-insured of the offending vehicle have not questioned the impugned award on any count, thus, has attained finality so far it relates to them. 3. The claimants have questioned the impugned award only on the ground of adequacy of compensation. 4. Thus, the core question to be determined in this appeal is – whether the amount awarded is inadequate? The answer is in the affirmative for the following reasons: 5. Admittedly, the deceased was a government servant – was working as Patwari in Revenue Department and at the relevant point of time, his monthly salary was 13,747/-, as per salary certificate, Ext. PW5/ A. 6. Though, the claimants have pleaded and proved that in addition to his service, the deceased was also an agriculturist, having a dairy farm and was earning 6,000/- per month from agricultural vocations and dairy farm, but, the Tribunal has not taken the said income into account. 7. Keeping all factors in view read with the salary certificate, Ext. PW5/A, roughly it can be said that the deceased was earning not less than 16,000/- per month. 8. Onefourth was to be deducted towards the personal expenses of the deceased while keeping in view the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case titled as Sarla Verma (Smt) and others versus Delhi Transport Corporation and another, reported in (2009) 6 SCC 121 , which was upheld by a larger Bench of the Apex Court in Reshma Kumari & Ors. versus Madan Mohan & Anr., reported in 2013 AIR SCW 3120. Accordingly, it is held that the claimants have lost source of dependency to the tune of 12,000/- per month. 9. versus Madan Mohan & Anr., reported in 2013 AIR SCW 3120. Accordingly, it is held that the claimants have lost source of dependency to the tune of 12,000/- per month. 9. In view of the averments contained in the claim petition read with the age of the deceased, ratio laid down by the Apex Court in Sarla Verma's and Reshma Kumari's cases (supra) and the Second Schedule appended with the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short “MV Act”), multiplier of 15' is to be applied. 10. Thus, the claimants are held entitled to 12,000/- x 12 x 15 = 21,60,000/- under the head 'loss of income/dependency'. 11. The claimants are also held entitled to 10,000/- each under the heads 'loss of consortium', 'loss of estate', 'loss of love and affection' and 'funeral expenses'. 12. Viewed thus, it is held that the claimants are entitled to compensation to the tune of 21,60,000/-+ 10,000/-+ 10,000/-+ 10,000/-+ 10,000/-= 22,00,000/- with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of the claim petition till its realization. 13. The insurer is directed to deposit the enhanced awarded amount before the Registry of this Court within eight weeks. On deposition of the amount, the entire awarded amount be released in favour of the claimants strictly as per the terms and conditions contained in the impugned award after proper identification through payee's account cheque or by depositing the same in their respective bank accounts. 14. Having glance of the above discussions, the impugned award is modified, as indicated hereinabove, and the appeal is disposed of accordingly. 15. Send down the record after placing copy of the judgment on Tribunal's file. 16. Send down the record after placing copy of the judgment on the Tribunal's file.