JUDGMENT & ORDER : 1. Heard Mr. A Gonchoudhury, the learned counsel for the appellant insurer. Also heard Mr. S Ghosh, the learned counsel, appearing for the claimant respondents. 2. The appeal is directed against the award, dated 19-7-2013, passed by the learned Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, West Tripura, Agartala, in Case No.T.S(MAC)226/2012, granting a sum of Rs.7,73,664/- as compensation in favour of claimant-respondent Nos.1 to 3. 3. The material facts of the case are that on 12-12-2011 at about 17.30 hours when the deceased victim Rajkumar Das was proceeding from Assampara on foot towards Krishna Tali, he was hit by one motorcycle bearing No.TR-01K-4962 coming from Agartala side in a very high speed and in rash and negligent manner. As a result, the deceased fell down on the road, sustained serious injuries and ultimately succumbed to his bleeding injuries. 4. The factum of accident as well as the manner in which the accident took place has not been disputed. The only grievance of the appellant-insurer as projected by the learned counsel for the insurer is that the Pension Payment Order (PPO) of the deceased vide Annexure –1 clearly indicates that he was born on 17-11-1949, according to which, he was 62 years at the time of the accident, the Tribunal has grossly erred in taking the age of the deceased victim to be 60 years and thus wrongly adopted a multiplier of ‘9', which should have been ‘7’. 5. There can be no dispute that when the deceased was found to be 62 years of age on the basis of his Pension Payment Order, the Tribunal should have adopted a multiplier of 7 and not 9. Under the circumstances, the impugned award shall have to be modified. As the monthly income of the deceased is found to be Rs.10,537/- per month, his yearly income comes to Rs.1,26,444/- from which one third should be deducted as his personal and living expenses and, which comes to Rs.84,296/-, which, when multiplied by 7, works out to be Rs.5,90,072/-. Thus, a sum of Rs.5,90,072/- is the loss of dependency to the surviving members of the deceased. The funeral expenses awarded by the Tribunal shall be enhanced to Rs.15,000/-, while the loss of consortium shall be further enhanced to Rs.50,000/-. Another sum of Rs.50,000/- shall be awarded to the claimant-respondents by way of loss of estate. Thus, a sum of Rs.5,90,072/- is the loss of dependency to the surviving members of the deceased. The funeral expenses awarded by the Tribunal shall be enhanced to Rs.15,000/-, while the loss of consortium shall be further enhanced to Rs.50,000/-. Another sum of Rs.50,000/- shall be awarded to the claimant-respondents by way of loss of estate. Therefore, the total amount of compensation payable to the claimant-respondents will come to Rs.5,90,072+15,000+50,000+50,000=Rs.7,05,072/- (Rupees seven lakhs five thousand and seventy-two) only. The claimant-respondents shall also be entitled to interest @ 9% per annum on the enhanced amount from the date of 22-5-2012. 6. The result of the foregoing discussion is that the entire amount of compensation shall be deposited by the appellant-insurer with the Registry of this Court within 2(two) months from the date of receipt of this judgment. Needless to say, the amount already paid/deposited by the appellant-insurer shall be adjusted accordingly. Out of the enhanced amount of compensation so awarded with the interest accrued thereon, the claimant-respondent No.1(Smt. Kalpana Das) will be entitled to 40%, while the claimant-respondent No.2(Sri Swapan Kumar Das) and the claimant-respondent No.3(Sri Goutam Das) will be entitled to 30% each. As and when the amount is deposited, the same shall be released to the claimant-respondents after satisfying the usual formalities without further reference to this Court. The impugned judgment and award stands modified to the extent and in the manner indicated above. 7. The appeal is, therefore, disposed of in the above terms. Transmit the lower court records forthwith.