ORDER : 1. Leave granted. 2. The appellants are the wife and parents of one Main Pal, who unfortunately died in a motor accident on 09.06.2010. He was riding a motorcycle with his father on the National Highway in District Karnal, when a truck, being driven rashly and negligently by respondent No.1, hit the motorcycle causing fatal injuries to Main Pal. 3. Main Pal was a brilliant student who did his three-year Diploma Course in Production Engineering from Government Polytechnic, Nilokheri in first division and a certificate to this effect was issued by the Institute on 21.08.2009 (Annexure P/2). Soon thereafter, he got a private employment on a monthly salary of Rs.7,500/-. Meanwhile, Main Pal competed for the post of Sailor in the Indian Navy and having qualified the recruitment examination, the Directorate of Manpower Planning & Recruitment, IHQ-Ministry of Defence (Navy), Sena Bhawan, New Delhi informed him vide memo dated 29.06.2010 (Annexure P/3) that he had been 'provisionally selected for recruitment in the Indian Navy'. He was called for interview and final medical examination, which were the procedural requirements, to be followed by his basic training at INS, Chilka in: (a) Academic and service subjects. (b) Sports Activities. (c) Outdoor training such as Parade Training. Sailing, Trekking Cross-Country, firing etc. (d) Service oriented activities including maintenance of equipment, living spaces and training etc. 4. Clause 7 of the offer of appointment further recited as follows: '7. During your training period and thereafter, you will be entitled to full pay and allowances, free uniforms, food and accommodation as per current orders. On completion of Training you will be entitled to the laid down the services and benefits as provided for, in the regulations. Your service condition will be governed by the current orders.' 5. Unfortunately, as noticed earlier, even before receiving the offer of appointment from the Indian Navy, Main Pal met with the road accident where he lost his life on 09.06.2010. 6. The appellants filed a claim petition and the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Karnal vide Award dated 08.10.2011 granted them a compensation of Rs.9,75,000/- on the premise that the deceased was earning Rs.7,500/- per month at the time of his death. The appellants being dissatisfied approached the High Court and vide the impugned judgment, the High Court has enhanced the compensation to Rs.16,67,000/-, thereby giving an enhancement of about Rs.6,92,000/-. 7. The appellants being dissatisfied approached the High Court and vide the impugned judgment, the High Court has enhanced the compensation to Rs.16,67,000/-, thereby giving an enhancement of about Rs.6,92,000/-. 7. On perusal of paragraph 11 of the impugned judgment of the High Court, we find that the High Court after noticing that the monthly income of the deceased was Rs.7,500/-, has, without any reason, reduced it to Rs.7,000/- for the purpose of applying the multiplier of 18. 8. Still aggrieved, the appellants are before us. 9. We have heard learned counsel for the parties. The record has been perused. The short question that falls for consideration is whether the compensation should be assessed on the basis of the monthly income the deceased was drawing from his private employment or keeping in view the fact that, in that very month, in which he met with an accident, he had been offered appointment by the Indian Navy as a Sailor and he was entitled to full pay and allowances even during the training. 10. It may be mentioned that the salary on joining the Indian Navy would have been Rs.19,000/- per month. In this regard, it seems to us that it was not a case of any speculative income or guesstimation. There was an offer of appointment by the Indian Navy on 29.06.2010 and the conditions of interview or final medical examination were merely the pre-requisite formalities before allowing the selectee to resume basic training at INS, Chilka. The offer of appointment, in no uncertain terms, held him entitled to 'full pay and allowances, free uniforms, food and accommodation as per current orders'. On completion of training, Main Pal would have been entitled to 'the laid down the services and benefits as provided for, in the regulations.' We are satisfied that the deceased Main Pal having been offered the aforesaid appointment, would have earned Rs.19,000/- per month as salary but for the unfortunate fatal accident. We are, thus, of the view that the appellants are entitled to compensation on the basis of income of Rs.19,000/- per month which the deceased would have drawn from the month of July, 2010 onwards. In this manner, the difference in monthly income awarded by the High Court and, as assessed by us, comes to Rs.11,500/- per month. We are, thus, of the view that the appellants are entitled to compensation on the basis of income of Rs.19,000/- per month which the deceased would have drawn from the month of July, 2010 onwards. In this manner, the difference in monthly income awarded by the High Court and, as assessed by us, comes to Rs.11,500/- per month. For the purpose of 50% future prospects on the revised monthly income, it would be Rs.17,250/-after applying 30% deduction which the deceased would have spent on himself, the monthly income is liable to be further reduced to Rs.12,075/- per month. 11. Having assessed the monthly income of the deceased in the manner above, we are satisfied that the multiplier of 18 applied by the High Court was correct. The same would, thus, apply here also. In this manner, the appellants shall be entitled to the enhanced compensation of Rs.26,08,200/- in addition to what has already been granted by the High Court. 12. We further deem it appropriate to direct that out of the enhanced amount of compensation, 50% shall be paid to appellant No.1 (Sonika) wife of the deceased and the same shall be directly deposited in her bank account. Similarly, the remaining 50% enhanced compensation shall be paid equally to appellant Nos. 2 and 3 (Santosh and Ramesh), who are parents of the deceased. The enhanced amount shall be paid by respondent No.3-Insurance Company within six weeks from today. Ordered accordingly. 13. The appeal stands disposed of, in the above terms.