JUDGMENT : R. Sudhakar, J. 1. The appeal is of the year 2011. It is a case of fatal accident. 2. The Appellant-State of Jammu and Kashmir has filed the appeal challenging the award dated 19.04.2010 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kathua. 3. Accident in this case has happened on 01.02.1998 at about 1.30 pm at Gangroo near Ramsoo. Fifty two year old Assistant Sub-Inspector Shuker Din, in Jammu and Kashmir Police Department along with his colleagues was travelling in the Truck which was carrying Arms and Ammunitions while on election duty during the parliamentary Elections held in the year 1998. The driver of the Vehicle drove the vehicle in a rash and negligent manner and the Truck rolled over and in that accident Shuker Din and other co-passengers died. The driver of the Truck is stated to have also died in that accident. 4. On his death, wife, two sons and three minor daughters have filed the claim petition for grant of compensation. 5. On the plea of negligence on the part of the driver, there appears to be no serious dispute. The finding of the Tribunal is based on the oral and documentary evidence. The vehicle was also insured with the Insurance Company. The Tribunal, however, held that the State-appellants who had requisitioned the vehicle for election duty was in their effective control as owners, hence liable to compensate the claimants on the death of Shuker Din. 6. The Tribunal relied upon a decision of the Supreme Court in case titled National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Deepa Devi & Anr. reported as AIR 2008 SC 735 . 7. Insofar as the compensation is concerned, Tribunal has fixed the income of the deceased as Rs.7900/- and after deducting 1/3rd towards his personal expenses in a sum of Rs.2633/-, the monthly pecuniary loss to the dependents was fixed at Rs.5267/-. The annual pecuniary loss therefore comes to Rs.6,95,244/- (Rs.5267x 11x12= Rs.6,95,244/-). The Tribunal in this case adopted 11 as multiplier. The following compensation was granted along with interest at the rate of 7.5% per month from the date of filing of the claim petition till the payment is made. 1. Loss of dependency Rs. 6,95,244/- 2. Loss of consortium Rs. 10,000/- 3. Loss to the estate Rs. 10,000/- 4. Funeral expenses Rs. 5,000/- Total Rs. 7,20,244/- 8. The following compensation was granted along with interest at the rate of 7.5% per month from the date of filing of the claim petition till the payment is made. 1. Loss of dependency Rs. 6,95,244/- 2. Loss of consortium Rs. 10,000/- 3. Loss to the estate Rs. 10,000/- 4. Funeral expenses Rs. 5,000/- Total Rs. 7,20,244/- 8. In appeal, the State contends that the vehicle is validly insured and, therefore, the owner and the Insurance Company alone are liable and the State is not liable. 9. This plea has to be rejected at its threshold in view of the decision of the Supreme Court in Deepa Devi's Case (supra). Admittedly, the Government had requisitioned the vehicle for election duty and was in effective control of the said vehicle as owner. Therefore, the finding of the Tribunal is up-held and the plea of the appellants is rejected. 10. On quantum, it is pleaded that multiplier 11 is on the higher side. This argument also deserves to be rejected in terms of Para 42 of the Judgment rendered by Hon'ble Supreme Court in case titled Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transport Corpn. & Anr., reported in 2009 (6) SCC 121 . 11. In any event, as rightly pointed out by learned counsel for the respondents-claimants, there are six dependents and the deduction towards personal expenses should have been 1/4th whereas the Tribunal has made deductions of 1/3rd. No amount has been granted for loss of love and affection to five minor children. The claimants are prejudiced thereby. 12. There is absolutely no justification for reducing the compensation awarded. The appeal is dismissed. The claimants are entitled to withdraw the amount as per order of the Tribunal.