JUDGMENT : 1. This appeal by Union of India and Cross objections by claimants are directed against the Award dated 06.03.2012 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal Jammu (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal) in File No. 194/Claim titled Heera Devi & ors. vs. Union of India & ors. 2. Briefly stated the facts relevant for disposal of the appeal and cross objections are thus: On 21.05.2008, one Chander Parkash was travelling in an Army vehicle bearing Number 04K 007894W which was being driven by its driver in rash and negligent manner. On reaching Kanthan Bridge near Reasi, the driver of the offending vehicle lost its control as a result whereof the vehicle fell into river Chenab and the said Chander Parkash suffered multiple injuries to which he later on succumbed. The claimants who happen to be wife, minor children and mother of the deceased Chander Parkash lay claim for compensation in the amount of Rs.65.00 lacs from the appellant. The appellant-Union of India contested the claim on the plea that the accident in which Chander Parkash had died was not on account of any rash and negligent driving by the driver and, therefore, they were not liable to pay any compensation to the claimants. 3. On the basis of pleadings of parties, the Tribunal framed following issues: (a) Whether an accident occurred on 21.5.2008 near Kanthan bridge by the rash and negligent driving of offending Army vehicle no. 04K 007894 W in the hands of erring driver as a result of which deceased Chandra Prakash suffered fatal injuries ? OPP. (b) If issue no. l is proved in affirmative, whether petitioners are entitled to the compensation, if so to what amount and from whom? OPP (c) Relief. 4. Issue No.1 pertaining to the rash and negligent driving of the offending Army vehicle was decided by the Tribunal in favour of the claimants and against the Union of India. Appellant-Union of India is not aggrieved of the findings returned by the Tribunal on aforesaid issue. What is, however, debated before this Court is Issue No. 2 which pertains to quantum of compensation payable to the claimants. 5. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the Tribunal has gone wrong in assessing the quantum of compensation. Learned counsel also disputes the relevant multiplier applied while working out the loss of dependency of the claimants. What is, however, debated before this Court is Issue No. 2 which pertains to quantum of compensation payable to the claimants. 5. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the Tribunal has gone wrong in assessing the quantum of compensation. Learned counsel also disputes the relevant multiplier applied while working out the loss of dependency of the claimants. The Award of interest @ 7.5% too has been challenged by the appellant on the ground that the same is relatively on the higher side and does not represent the prevailing Bank rate of interest. The claimants too have assailed the Award by way of Cross objections in which it has been urged that the Tribunal has committed an error in the matter of applicability of relevant multiplier. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the claimants that the multiplier to be applied in this case should have been as provided in Paragraph No.21 of case titled Sarla Verma &ors. vs. Delhi Transport Corporation. It is thus submitted that going by the age of the deceased the multiplier of 15 should have been applied. Learned counsel for the claimants also urges that the amount paid under conventional heads is also not in consonance with the law laid down in case titled National Insurance Company Ltd. vs. Pranay Sethi & ors., 2017 ACJ 2700 . 6. After having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record, I would not find any substance insofar as the appeal preferred by the appellant is concerned. Union of India has not been able to point out as to how the amount allowed by the Tribunal is excessive. The interest @ 7.5% awarded by the Tribunal also cannot be found fault with as the same is not only reasonable but also in consonance with the prevailing Bank rates. Moreover, this Court has been consistently awarding interest @ 7.5% on the amount of compensation payable under M.V. Act. 7. The claimants having fairly established before the Tribunal that monthly salary of the deceased who was employed as Hawaldar with Indian Army at the relevant time was Rs.17779/-. This has been proved by the production of Salary Certificate and also by examination of PW-Naik Chander Bhan. The claimants have also proved by placing on record the date of birth certificate that the date of birth of the deceased was 12.08.1971. This has been proved by the production of Salary Certificate and also by examination of PW-Naik Chander Bhan. The claimants have also proved by placing on record the date of birth certificate that the date of birth of the deceased was 12.08.1971. The Tribunal after making necessary deductions on account of income tax took monthly income of the deceased as Rs. 17500/-. Since the deceased was proved to be 36 years old, accordingly the Tribunal made addition of 50% to actual salary towards his future prospectus. However, instead of applying multiplier of 15 as is applicable to a person who is 36 years old, the Tribunal applied multiplier of 13 having regard to uncertainties of life and in order to arrive at just and fair compensation. In view of the law laid down in case Sarla Verma & ors. vs. Delhi Transport Corporation which was approved by the Constitutional Bench in case National Insurance Company Ltd. vs. Pranay Sethi & ors., the multiplier provided in para ‘21’ is to be applied as it is and cannot be slashed down having regard to uncertainties of life etc. That being so, learned counsel for the claimants is correct that in the instant case the multiplier applicable would be 15 and not 13 as applied by the Tribunal. On the conventional heads like funeral expenses, loss of estate, loss of consortium, the amount payable is Rs. 15,000/-, Rs. 15,000/-and Rs. 40,000/-respectively. This is so laid down by the Constitutional Bench in National Insurance Company Ltd. vs. Pranay Sethi & ors. The Tribunal was thus incorrect in granting Rs. 5000/-Rs. 10,000/-and Rs. 10,000/-under these Heads. 8. Accordingly, while dismissing the appeal of Union of India, the Cross objections filed by the claimants is allowed. 9. The claimants are held entitled to an amount of Rs. 36, 13,840/-(Rupees Thirty six Lac Thirteen thousand eight hundred forty) with the break up as follows: While fixing the income of the deceased at Rs. 17500/-per month, future prospects @ 50% i.e. Rs.8750/-has to be added, which comes to Rs. 26,250-(Rs.17500/-+8750/-). After deducting 1/4towards the personal expenses of the deceased it comes to Rs. 6562/-, the total loss of dependency comes to Rs. 19,688/-(Rs.26250-Rs. 6562 =Rs.19688/-). The loss of annual dependency comes to Rs. 19688 x 12 = Rs.23,62,56/-. 17500/-per month, future prospects @ 50% i.e. Rs.8750/-has to be added, which comes to Rs. 26,250-(Rs.17500/-+8750/-). After deducting 1/4towards the personal expenses of the deceased it comes to Rs. 6562/-, the total loss of dependency comes to Rs. 19,688/-(Rs.26250-Rs. 6562 =Rs.19688/-). The loss of annual dependency comes to Rs. 19688 x 12 = Rs.23,62,56/-. The total loss of dependency, after adopting multiplier of 15 taking note of the age of deceased as 36 years at the time of accident, comes to Rs.236256 x 15 = Rs. 35,43,840/-. Accordingly, the total modified award is as under: 10. The appellant-Union of India is granted six weeks time to deposit the amount in terms of the modified before the Registry of this Court. Registry shall release the amount in favour of the claimants in terms of the modified award after proper identification. S. No. Particulars Award of the Tribunal Modified Award Modified And confirmed 01. For loss of dependency Rs.30,72,000- Rs. 35,43,840/- 02. For funeral expenses Rs. 5,000/- Rs.15,000/- 03. For loss of Estate Rs. 10,000/- Rs. 15,000/- 04. For loss of consortium Rs. 10,000/- Rs. 40,000/- Total Rs.30, 97,000/- Rs.36,13,840/-(Rupees Thirty six lac thirteen thousand eight hundred forty). Interest @ 7.5% as provided by the Tribunal is confirmed. 10. The appellant-Union of India is granted six weeks time to deposit the amount in terms of the modified before the Registry of this Court. Registry shall release the amount in favour of the claimants in terms of the modified award after proper identification.