JUDGMENT : SURESHWAR THAKUR, J. 1. The instant appeal, is, directed against the award of 14.6.2017, pronounced by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (III), Circuit Court at Amb, District Una, H.P. in M.A.C Petition No. 11 of 2016, whereunder, an apt indemnificatory liability stands fastened, upon, the appellants, to, pay compensation amount constituted in a sum of Rs.66,12,461/alongwith interest @ 9% per annum, from the date of filing the petition till its deposit, vis-a-vis, the claimants’/ respondents No. 1, 3 and 4 herein. 2. The learned counsel for the appellants, has contested the validity, of, the findings returned, upon, the issue appertaining, to, the relevant mishap being caused, by the rash, and, negligent manner, of, driving, of, the offending vehicle, by its driver/respondent No.5 herein. In making the aforesaid submission, he relies upon the testimony rendered by the driver of the offending vehicle. However, the aforesaid submission cannot be accepted, as, an ocular witness to the occurrence, one Naresh Kumar (PW4), rather stepped into the witness box, and, has rendered an apt version, where within echoings occur, qua the relevant mishap standing sparked by the rash, and, negligent manner, of, driving, of, the offending vehicle, by its driver/respondent No.5 herein. Further more, with the apt FIR proven by PW2 Shri Saveen Kumar, rather unraveling therein, ascription, of, an apt incriminatory role vis-a-vis driver/ respondent No.3, of, the offending vehicle, thereupon the non-lodging of FIR, by, the driver of the offending vehicle also rather disables him to render a testification contradictory therewith. 3. However, the learned counsel for the appellants, submits that the assessment, of, compensation made by the learned tribunal, under the heads; loss of consortium, visavis, the widow of the deceased, and, under the head of loss of love and affection, besides, under the head funeral expenses, respectively, quantified in a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/; Rs.1,00,000/- and Rs. 25,000/- rather falling in disconcurrence with the mandate recorded by the Hon’ble Apex Court in case titled as National Insurance Company Ltd. vs. Pranay Sethi and others, reported in 2017 ACJ 2700 . 4. The aforesaid submission has force, and, in consonance with the verdict supra, hence sum(s) of Rs. 1 lac , 1 lac and 25,000/- assessed, as, compensation under the heads “loss of love and affection”, “loss of consortium” and “funeral expanses” is set aside. 4. The aforesaid submission has force, and, in consonance with the verdict supra, hence sum(s) of Rs. 1 lac , 1 lac and 25,000/- assessed, as, compensation under the heads “loss of love and affection”, “loss of consortium” and “funeral expanses” is set aside. However, now at, the claimants are entitled to, under, conventional heads, namely, “funeral expense”, and, “loss of estate” compensation amount borne in a sum of Rs. 15,000/each and, the widow of the deceased is entitled to, under, conventional head, namely “consortium to wife”, compensation amount(s) borne in a sum of Rs.40,000/. 5. The learned counsel for respondents No.1 to 4, has also contended that the learned Tribunal has not meted, any, appropriate multiplier, upon, the figure of annual dependency, worked, vis-a-vis, the claimants. She submits that, despite, the matriculation certificate of the deceased, as, comprised in PW6/C rather making a clear revelation qua the deceased hence being at the relevant time, aged 25 years, yet the learned Tribunal assessed his age at 26 years, and, accordingly has proceeded, to, mete an erroneous multiplier, to, the apt figure of annual dependency. 6. The aforesaid submission has vigor, and, with the age of the deceased in the extant case, and, at the relevant time, being evidently 25 years, thereupon, the compensation amount stands reworked as (a) after meteing of 50% apt increase vis-a-vis the figure of annual dependency i.e Rs.39159/-( last drawn salary of the deceased) + 19,579.5/-( 50% of the last drawn salary)= Rs. 58738.8/-per month or say Rs.58700/, thereupon the apt Annual income stands computed, as, Rs. 58700/-x 12= 7,04,400/-, (b) deducting 20 % towards income tax i.e Rs. 1,40,800/-, (c) the apposite remaining amount comes to Rs. 5,63,600/- and after deducting 1/3rd therefrom, towards personal expenses of the deceased, the, amount comes to Rs. 3,75,733/. At the time of her death the deceased was aged 25 years, hence thereon, in consonance with the verdict of Hon’ble Apex Court in Sarla Verma and others versus Delhi Transport Corporation and another 2009(6) SCC 121 , the proper multiplier, to be adopted, is 18. Adopting, hence, a, multiplier of 18, thereupon, the total loss of dependency, is calculated at Rs. 3,75,733 x 18 =67,63,194/-. 7. Adopting, hence, a, multiplier of 18, thereupon, the total loss of dependency, is calculated at Rs. 3,75,733 x 18 =67,63,194/-. 7. The afore reassessing of multiplier, to, the figure of annual dependency, dehors, no appeal or cross objection being preferred by the claimants, vis-a-vis, the instant appeal preferred here before by the appellants stands anvilled, upon, a verdict rendered by the Hon’ble Apex Court, in a judgment titled, as, United India Insurance Company Ltd. Versus Smt. Kulwant Kaur, reported in latest HLJ 2014 (HP) 174, (i) wherein a mandate is borne qua the appellate authority rather acting within ambit of apt jurisdiction, in, enhancing compensation, despite the claimants not questioning the adequacy of compensation. 8. Accordingly, the appeal is partly allowed and the award is modified to the extent above. Accordingly the claimants, are held entitled to a total compensation of Rs.67,63,194+Rs.40,000+Rs.15,000+ Rs.15,000 =Rs.68,33,194/alongwith interest @ 7.5% per annum, from the date of filing of petition till realization of awarded amount. Compensation amount be apportioned amongst the claimants in the manner, as, made by the learned Tribunal. 9. The amount of interim compensation, if awarded, be adjusted against the aforesaid compensation amount, at the time of final payment. Since the claimant/respondent No.4 herein is minor, hence the amount of compensation qua his share is ordered to be kept in the FDR drawn upon some nationalized bank till he attains majority All pending applications also stand disposed of. Records be sent back forthwith.