S.S.SUDHALKAR, J. - (1.) THIS appeal is filed by the claimants in M.A.C.T. Case No. 31 of 1998 decided on 27.7.99. The appellants are the parents of Kulbir Singh (deceased) who met with an unfortunate accident on 3.12.1997, which proved fatal to him. Kulbir Singh was unmarried and hence the claim for compensation was made by the appellants who are his parents. The Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 2,00,000/- as compensation to the appellants which they are held entitled in the equal share. This appeal is filed by the claimants for enhancement of the amount of compensation.
(2.) WE have heard learned counsel for the appellants. Learned counsel for the appellants argued that the amount awarded is much on the lower side. According to him, the deceased was earning Rs. 4000/- per month. Learned counsel further argued that the Tribunal had not calculated the amount of compensation and has awarded the lump sum amount. It is true that the Tribunal has awarded only the lump sum amount without calculating the amount under different heads. It is certainly not proper. The Tribunal should consider the amount awardable under each heads, argued and proved before the Tribunal and then come to the conclusion of the awardable amount after making a sum of the amounts which can be awarded under different heads. Learned counsel for the appellants has argued that Rs. 1000/- can be said to be the dependency of the deceased. He has also suggested that multiplier of 13 years be applied in this case. The balance income which is left for consideration for loss of dependency is Rs. 3000. The deceased was unmarried. He was likely to be married in the near future and he would have had his own family to maintain and day by day and he would have spent more and more for his own family also. Considering all these factors it will be appropriate to hold that one third should be the dependency in such like cases. Considering the above principle, the dependency should Rs. 1000/- per month i.e. Rs. 12000/- per year. Applying the multiplier of 13, as suggested by learned counsel for the appellants, the total amount comes to Rs. 1,56,000/- and after adding the amount for loss of expectation of life and other expenses, we do not find that the award of the Tribunal is on the lower side.
(3.) NO further ground is argued.;