JUDGMENT : The present Appeal is preferred under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 , seeking enhancement of compensation awarded by the learned Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Buldhana in MACP No. 39/2005 vide Judgment and Award dated 6/5/2009. 2. The Claim Petition pertains to claim for compensation on account of demise of one Totaram Shankar Bakatkar in a road accident on 2/2/2005. The Appellant No.1 is widow, Appellant Nos. 2 and 3 are children and Appellant Nos. 4 and 5 are father and mother respectively of deceased Totaram. 3. The deceased Totaram was working as a teacher in Zilla Parishad Primary School, Saramba, Tahsil Deulgaon Raja, District Buldhana at the timeof his sad demise. He was drawing salary of Rs. 10,363/- per month. His date of birth is 3/6/1966, and as such, on the date of his demise he was 38 years old. 4. The Respondent No.1 is owner of the offending truck, with which deceased Totaram met with the fateful accident. The truck owned by the Respondent No.1 was insured with the Respondent No.2. 5. In such circumstances, the Appellants filed a Claim Petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act claiming compensation of Rs.15,00,000/- on account of death of Totaram Shankar Bakatkar in the said road accident. The Respondent No.1 did not contest the Claim Petition. The Respondent No.2 filed written statement opposing the claim. Based on the rival pleadings, the learned Tribunal framed issues, on the basis of which, the Appellants led their evidence by examining the Appellant No.1. The Respondent No.2 did not lead any evidence. As stated above, the Respondent No.1 did not contest the matter. 6. After recording the evidence and hearing the respective submissions, learned Tribunal computed total compensation payable to the Appellants at Rs.9,08,500/-. The amount of Rs.50,000/- paid towards No Fault Liability was deducted from the said amount. The learned Tribunal directed payment of compensation of Rs.8,58,500/- along with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of Petition till realization of the amount. The learned Tribunal has determined the annual income of the deceased at Rs.84,000/-, deducted 1/3rd amount towards personal expenses of the deceased and has applied multiplier of 16 to determine the compensation payable under the head 'Loss of Dependency' at Rs. 8,96,000/-. Apart from this, a sum of Rs. The learned Tribunal has determined the annual income of the deceased at Rs.84,000/-, deducted 1/3rd amount towards personal expenses of the deceased and has applied multiplier of 16 to determine the compensation payable under the head 'Loss of Dependency' at Rs. 8,96,000/-. Apart from this, a sum of Rs. 5000/- was ordered to be paid to the Appellant No.1 towards consortium and Rs.5000/- each to the Appellant Nos.2 & 3/ children towards loss of love and affection of father. An amount of Rs.2500/- was ordered to be paid towards funeral expenses. The Appellants have filed the present Appeal being aggrieved by the quantum of compensation. 7. Mr. R. M. Bhangde, learned Counsel for the Appellants draws my attention to the Judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sarla Verma (Smt) and Others V/s Delhi Transport Corporation and Another, (2009) 6 Supreme Court Cases 121, which is expressly confirmed by the Constitution Bench Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of National Insurance Company Ltd V/s Pranay Sethi and Others, (2017) 16 Supreme Court Cases 680 , in order to urge that the learned Tribunal has erred in applying the multiplier and deduction towards personal expenses of the deceased. He then placed his reliance upon the Judgment of Hon'ble SupremeCourt in the case of Magma General Insurance Company Limited V/s Nanu Ram Alias Chuhru Ram and Others, (2018) 18 Supreme Court Cases 130 , to contend that the learned Tribunal has erred in not awarding appropriate compensation towards consortium. He submits that the wife, children and parents were entitled to consortium at the rate of Rs. 48,400/- each, as against which, a sum of Rs. 5000/- each is awarded to the Appellant No.1 towards consortium and Appellant Nos.2 and 3 towards loss of love and affection of father and no amount is awarded to the parents. He prays that amount of compensation be enhanced appropriately and the amount should be ordered to be paid along with interest at the rate of atleast 12% per annum from the date of filing of Petition till the date of realization of entire amount. 8. As against this, Mr. M. R. Joharapurkar, learned Counsel for the Respondent No.2 contends that the learned Tribunal has computed the compensation correctly on account of loss of financial dependency. 8. As against this, Mr. M. R. Joharapurkar, learned Counsel for the Respondent No.2 contends that the learned Tribunal has computed the compensation correctly on account of loss of financial dependency. The learned Counsel did not seriously oppose the entitlement of Appellants to receive consortium in accordance with the Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Magma General Insurance Company Limited (supra). As regards the claim for interest, learned Counsel for the Respondent No.2 contended that the current judicial trend is to award interest between 6% to7.5% only. He submits that the Appellants cannot claim windfall on account of sad demise of the deceased. 9. In view of above, following points arise for determination in the present Appeal : (1) What is the amount of compensation that should be awarded to the Appellants under the head 'loss of financial dependency' ? (2) What is the amount of compensation that should be awarded to the Appellants towards consortium, funeral expenses and loss of estate ? (3) What should be the rate of interest payable on the quantum of compensation ? AS TO POINT NO.1 : 10. The date of birth of the deceased is 3/6/1966. This fact is duly proved by the Birth Certificate (Exhibit-37) and School Leaving Certificate (Exhibit-35). He has expired on 2/2/2005. Thus, on the date of his demise he was 38 years old. Multiplier of 15 has to be applied to be his annual income, in view of paragraph No.24, in the Judgment of Sarla Verma (supra) as confirmed in paragraph No. 59.3 in the case of Pranay Sethi & Others (supra). 11. The deceased is survived by five dependents namely, his widow, two children, father and mother. Thus, as per paragraph No. 30 in Sarla Verma's case (supra) as confirmed in paragraph No. 41 in Pranay Sethis case (supra), 1/4th deduction will have to be made from his annual income towards personal expenses. The deceased was a teacher in Zilla Parishad School. At the time of his demise, he was drawing salary of Rs.10,363/- per month. The Salary Certificate of deceased is proved and marked as 'Exhibit-21'. Perusal of the Salary Certificate indicates that a sum of Rs.200/­ was deducted towards the professional tax. His gross salary, after deduction of tax, is Rs.10,363/-. The deceased was a teacher in Zilla Parishad School. At the time of his demise, he was drawing salary of Rs.10,363/- per month. The Salary Certificate of deceased is proved and marked as 'Exhibit-21'. Perusal of the Salary Certificate indicates that a sum of Rs.200/­ was deducted towards the professional tax. His gross salary, after deduction of tax, is Rs.10,363/-. Since the deceased was 38 years old and working as a teacher in Zilla Parishad School, an addition of 50% will have to be made towards future prospects in terms of paragraph No.59.3 in the case of Pranay Sethi & Others. This 50% component works out to Rs. 5081/- per month. Therefore, for the purpose of computation of compensation, monthly income of the deceased would be Rs.15,244/-. Out of this, Rs.3811/- will have to be deducted towards personal expenses (1/ 4th amount). The monthly loss of dependence, thus, works out to Rs.l1,433/- and the annual loss of dependency comes to Rs.1,37,196/-. As already held, multiplier of 15 is applicable in the present case. As such, the total compensation payable on account of loss of income works out to Rs. 20,57,940/-. AS TO POINT NO.2 : 12. The deceased is survived by the wife who is entitled to spousal consortium, children who are entitled to parental consortium and parents who are entitled to filial consortium. Five dependents are entitled to consortium of Rs.40,000/- each in the light of law laid down in the case of Magma General Insurance Company Limited Thus, the total amount of compensation payable towards consortium works out to Rs.2,00,000/-. Since the deceased has breathed his last on 2/2/2005, the consortium payable will be Rs.40,000/- per head and not Rs.48,400/- as contended by the Appellants. In addition to this, the Appellants are entitled to receive Rs.30,000/- (Rs.15,000/- towards funeral expenses + Rs.15,000/- towards loss of estate). AS TO POINT NO.3 : 13. The learned Tribunal has awarded the interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of application till the date of realization of the amount. 14. The learned Counsel for Appellants vehemently argues that the interest should be paid atleast at the rate of 12% per annum. As against this, learned Counsel for the Respondent No.2 contended that rate of interest awarded by the learned Tribunal is just and proper and does not warrant any enhancement. 15. Mr. 14. The learned Counsel for Appellants vehemently argues that the interest should be paid atleast at the rate of 12% per annum. As against this, learned Counsel for the Respondent No.2 contended that rate of interest awarded by the learned Tribunal is just and proper and does not warrant any enhancement. 15. Mr. Bhangade, learned Counsel for the Appellants has placed strong reliance on the Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Puttamma and Others V/s K L. Narayana Reddy and Another, (2013) 15 Supreme Court Cases 45. He contends that the Hon'ble Supreme Court has taken into consideration various enactments, such as, the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923, the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, which contain specific provisions regarding rate of interest. His contention is that the family had lost a young man aged about 38 years. The death had occurred in the year 2005 and they are litigating for right to receive just compensation in accordance with law for a period of around two decades. He, therefore, submits that interest should be awarded at the rate of 12% per annum, at least. His contention is that having regard to the rate of inflation, rising prices of real estate and other tangible goods, interest at the rate of 12% should be awarded in order to justifiably recompense the Appellants. His contention is that the amount, which the Appellants will now receive after the Appeal is decided, ought to have been paid to the Appellants immediately upon the demise of the deceased in the year 2005 itself. 16. Apart from the Judgment in the case of Puttamma and Others (supra), Mr. Bhangade has placed reliance on the following Judgments of theHon'ble Supreme Court. o New India Assurance Company Limited V/s Kendra Devi and Others, (2007) 14 Supreme Court Cases 299; o Devi Dayal Kansal and Others V/s Raj Roop and Another, (2000) 10 Supreme Court Cases 314; o Ashwini Kumar Mishra V/s P. Muniam Babu and Others, (1999) 4 Supreme Court Cases 22; o Swatantra Kumar V/s Qamar Ali and Others, (1998) 5 Supreme Court Cases 308; o Shashendra Lahri V/s UNICEF and Others, (1997) 11 Supreme Court Cases 446; o United India Insurance Co. Ltd. V/s Narendra Pandurang Kadam and Others, (1995) 1 Supreme Court Cases 320; and o Urmilla Pandey and Others V/s Khalil Ahmad and Others, (1994) 4 Supreme Court Cases 207. 17. In all these cases, interest is awarded by the Hon'ble Supreme Court at the rate of 12% per annum. All these cases arise out of Motor Accident Claims. 18. As against this, Mr. Joharapurkar, learned Counsel for the Respondent No.2 has placed strong reliance on the Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Kaushnuma Begum (Smt) and Others V/s New India Assurance Company Ltd. and Others, (2001) 2 Supreme Court Cases 9 . Drawing attention to paragraph No.24 of the said Judgment, learned Counsel submits that the earlier view in motor accident cases was that compensation should be awarded with interest at the rate of 12% per annum. However, with change in economy, the rate of interest was reduced to 9% per annum which was the then prevailing rate of interest granted by the Nationalized Banks on fixed deposits. He refers to another Supreme Court Judgment in the case of United India Insurance Co. Ltd and Others V/s Patrida Jean Mahajan and Othed, (2002) 6 Supreme Court Cases 281, wherein it is held that interest was awarded at the rate of 9% per annum by reaffirming the view taken in Kaushnuma Begum and Others (supra). He then refers to the Judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Abati Bezbaruah V/s Dy. Director General Geological Survey of India and Another, (2003) 3 Supreme Court Cases 148, wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held in paragraph 6 of the Judgment that the rate of interest on amount of compensation awarded always depends upon the facts and circumstances of each case, however, award of interest would normally depend upon the bank rate prevailing at the relevant time. Having so held, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has granted interest at the rate of 9% per annum in the said case. Other than the aforesaid Judgments, the learned Counsel has placed reliance on the following Judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, wherein the interest is awarded between 6% to 9% per annum. o T. N. State Transport Corpn. Having so held, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has granted interest at the rate of 9% per annum in the said case. Other than the aforesaid Judgments, the learned Counsel has placed reliance on the following Judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, wherein the interest is awarded between 6% to 9% per annum. o T. N. State Transport Corpn. Ltd. V/s S. Rajapriya and Others, (2005) 6Supreme Court Cases 236; o R. K. Malik and Another V/s Kiran Pal and Others, (2009) 14 SCC 1 ; o Santosh Devi V/s National Insurance Company Limited and Others, (2012) 6 Supreme Court Cases 421; o Erudhaya Priya V/s State Express Transport Corporation Ltd; 2020 SCC OnLine SC 601; and o Benson George V/s Reliance General Insurance Company Limited andAnother, (2022) 13 Supreme Court Cases 142. 19. Having perused the Judgments with the able assistance of the learned Counsel, it is found that the Supreme Court has, in the case of Kaushnuma Begum (supra) taken note of the fact that although earlier interest was being paid at the rate of 12% per annum, with change in economy and policies of the Reserve Bank of India, the interest rates have been lowered, and therefore, interest was awarded at the rate of 9% per annum which was commensurate with the then prevailing bank interest rates. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has also held in the case of Abati Bezbarauh (supra) that rate of interest awarded in motor accident case should be commensurate with the prevailing bank interest rates. 20. In the case of Abati Bezbarauh, in his concurring Judgment, Hon'ble Justice Laxmanan has observed that rate of interest must be just and reasonable depending upon various factors, such as rate of inflation, change in economy policy of the Reserve Bank of India with respect to rate of interest, the period for which the case was pending enormity of suffering, loss of income, loss of enjoyment of life etc. However, even with such observations interest was awarded at the rate of 9% per annum only. 21. As regards the Judgment in the case of Puttamma and Others relied upon by Mr. Bhangade, the said Judgment also refers to the Judgment of Kaushnuma Begum in paragraph No.61 and Abati Bezbarauh in paragraph No.62. The law laid down in the aforesaid Judgments is not disturbed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, it is rather reaffirmed. 21. As regards the Judgment in the case of Puttamma and Others relied upon by Mr. Bhangade, the said Judgment also refers to the Judgment of Kaushnuma Begum in paragraph No.61 and Abati Bezbarauh in paragraph No.62. The law laid down in the aforesaid Judgments is not disturbed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, it is rather reaffirmed. However, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has awarded interest at the rate of 12% per annum in the said case. The rate of interest is determined in paragraph No.66 of the Judgment. 22. Similar arguments with respect to the rate of interest, as are canvassed by Mr. Bhangade, were advanced before the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Kishan Gopal and Another V/s Lala and Others, 2014(1) SCC 244 . The Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed in paragraph No.40 of the said Judgment that if the amount was paid by the Insurance Company to the Claimant within a reasonable time, the deposit would have swelled by five times. The Hon'ble Supreme Court also took note of the fact that the Claimant was required to contest litigation for 21 years. In this backdrop, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has awarded interest at the rate of 9% per annum. 23. In the case of Kaushnuma Begum, the accident had occurred on 20/3/1986. In the case of Abati Bezbarauh, the accident had occurred on13/11/1990. Likewise, in the case of Puttamma, accident had occurred on27/7/1999. The rates of interest awarded by the banks are constantly on a decline. The prevailing rates of interest on fixed deposits with Nationalized Banks is hovering around 6% to 7% per annum. 24. As regards other Judgments relied upon by Mr. Bhangade, these Judgments do not lay down any legal proposition as regards the rate of interest. The rate of interest in those cases is granted as per discretion of theCourt. It will also be pertinent to state that Judgments pertain to the period when rates of interest were on the higher side. 25. The deceased was 38 years old on the date of his demise. At the relevant time, he was getting salary as per recommendations of S'h Pay Commission. After his demise, recommendations of 6th and 7th Pay Commissions have been made applicable from 1/1/2006 and 1/1/2016 respectively. The benefit of these pay revisions was extended to employees of the Zilla Parishads as well. At the relevant time, he was getting salary as per recommendations of S'h Pay Commission. After his demise, recommendations of 6th and 7th Pay Commissions have been made applicable from 1/1/2006 and 1/1/2016 respectively. The benefit of these pay revisions was extended to employees of the Zilla Parishads as well. Salaries were handsomely increased under the two Pay Commissions. Compensation in the present case is computed on the basis of pay of deceased Totaram under S'h Pay commission. It should also be mentioned that the deceased had 20 years of service left since age of superannuation of teachers of Zilla Parishad Schools is 58 years. Normally, his date of superannuation would have been 3/6/2024. 26. This is a factor, which is in favour of the Appellants. Apart from this, the Appellants are required to contest the litigation for a period of around twenty years for receiving compensation on account of demise of their family member, which is also a factor to be considered for granting interest at higher rate. However, as noted above, the prevailing rates of interest on fixed deposits awarded by the Nationalized Banks are around 6% to 7% only. Thus,having regard to the totality of circumstances, in my considered opinion, it will be just and equitable that interest is awarded at the rate of 9% per annum. In these circumstances, I proceed to pass following order. ORDER (1) The First Appeal is partly allowed. (2) The Respondent Nos.l and 2 are jointly and severally liable to pay compensation of Rs.23,87,940/- along with the interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of presentation of Claim Petition before the Tribunal i.e. 4/4/2005 till the date of realization of entire amount. (3) This amount will include the amount of Rs.50,000/- paid to the Appellants towards No Fault Liability under Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act. (4) The amount be paid as per the present Judgment and Award after adjusting the amount, that is already paid to the Appellants. (5) The apportionment of the compensation shall be as under : (i) Rs. 16,00,000/- be paid to the Appellant No.1 with interest; (ii) Rs.2,00,000/- each be paid to the Applicant Nos.2 and 3 with interest ; and (iii) Rs. 3,87,940/- be paid to the Appellant Nos.S and 6 together with interest. 27.The First Appeal stands disposed of in above terms with no orderas to costs.