JUDGMENT & ORDER : 1. Both the appeal and cross-appeal are being disposed of by this common judgment. Dissatisfied with the common judgment dated 19-12-2012 passed by a learned Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Khowai, West Tripura in T.S.(MAC) No.10/2012 awarding compensation of 14,21,000/- [corrected to Rs.13,44,000/- vide the order dated 20-6-2013 passed by the Tribunal in Case No.Civil Misc(Review) 3 of 2013] + Rs.5,000/- as loss of consortium together with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition, both the insurer and the claimant-respondents as cross-objector are preferring both the appeals. 2. Heard Mr. A. Gon Choudhury, the learned counsel for the appellant- New India Assurance Company Ltd.. Also heard Ms. M. Roy, the learned counsel for the claimant-respondents/cross-appellants and Mr. K. Bhattacharji, the learned counsel for the Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. 3. What happened in this case is that on 16-01-2012 at about 10.30 a.m., when the deceased(Narayan Das) was proceeding to Agartala with a motor bike bearing registration No.TR-01-G-6769 (Honda Unicorn) owned by respondent No.4 Sri Subhasish Das, a Mini Bus bearing registration No.TR-01-A-1308 coming from the opposite direction i.e. from the side of Agartala in a high speed driven in a rash and negligent manner dashed against him; he died on the spot. The body of the deceased was taken to Khowai hospital with the assistance of the police of the Khowai Police Station and others. Postmortem examination was conducted on the dead body of the deceased. On the death of the deceased, the cross-appellants filed claim petition [T.S(MAC) No.10/2012] before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Khowai, West Tripura. The cross-appellant No.1 is the wife of the deceased while cross-appellant No.2 is the mother of the deceased. The claim petition was resisted by the two insurance companies denying any liability as the driver of the vehicle was not at fault. 4. The Tribunal, after examining the witnesses, found that the deceased was aged 42 years at the time of the accident and that both the owner of the Mini Bus as well as the owner of the bike were equally responsible and are, therefore, liable to satisfy the award payable to the cross-appellants in equal proportion. According to the Tribunal, the deceased was engaged in vehicle business as owner of three vehicles and was earning a sum of Rs.12,000/- per month before his death. According to the Tribunal, the deceased was engaged in vehicle business as owner of three vehicles and was earning a sum of Rs.12,000/- per month before his death. On the basis of the income of the deceased so assessed as well as the age of 42 years so determined, the Tribunal by adopting a multiplier of 14 awarded a compensation of Rs.13,44,000/-. 5. The cross-appellants obviously did not file the admit card of the deceased in the course of trial and were allowed to file the same as additional vidence vide the order dated 5-12-2016 in I.A. No.1621/16. On going through the admit card produced by the cross-appellants, the genuineness thereof is not in issue, there is no doubt that the deceased was aged about 31 years at the time of his death. If that is so, the multiplier to be adopted for calculating the quantum of compensation should be at least 16 instead of 14 as held by the Tribunal. Accordingly, the compensation will come to Rs.12,000 × 16 × 12 = Rs.23,04,000/-. Out of which one third i.e. Rs.7,68,000/- should be deducted as his personal expenses and after deducting this amount from Rs.23,04,000/-, the loss of earning is found to be Rs.15,36,000/-. In my opinion, the amount of Rs.5,000/- so awarded by the Tribunal by way of funeral expenses of the deceased is on the lower side and is, accordingly, enhanced to Rs.25,000/-. So is the loss of estate assessed by the Tribunal at Rs.5,000/- and the same is enhanced to Rs.50,000/-. Another sum of Rs.50,000/- is awarded to the crossappellant No.1 for loss of consortium. Therefore, the total amount of compensation payable to the cross-appellants will come to Rs.15,36,000 + 25,000 + 50,000 + 50,000 = Rs.16,61,000/-(Rupees sixteen lakh sixty one thousand) only out of which the cross-appellant No. 1 will receive a sum of Rs.50,000/- by way of loss of consortium. The cross-appellants shall also be entitled to interest @ 6% per annum on the enhanced amount with effect from the date of filing of the claim petition. 6. The result of the foregoing discussion is that the cross-appeal is allowed. The entire amount of compensation shall be deposited by the two insurance companies i.e. respondent Nos.2 and 4 in equal share with the Registry of this Court within 2(two) months from the date of receipt of this judgment. 6. The result of the foregoing discussion is that the cross-appeal is allowed. The entire amount of compensation shall be deposited by the two insurance companies i.e. respondent Nos.2 and 4 in equal share 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. As and when the amount is deposited, the same shall be released to the cross-appellants as per their respective shares 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. MAC Appeal No.78 of 2013 is dismissed. MAC Appeal No.138 of 2013 is, accordingly, allowed. Transmit the lower court records forthwith.