Narendra Kumar Jain, J. - (1.) ADMIT .
(2.) ON the request of learned Counsel for both the parties, the final arguments were heard in the appeal and the same is being disposed of. The only point involved in the present appeal is about the application of proper multiplier for the purpose of awarding compensation in respect of death of Maniram, aged about 45 years. So far as point relating to death of deceased Maniram because of negligence on the part of defendant -respondents is concerned, the same is not in dispute as the present appeal has been preferred for the enhancement of the amount of compensation, therefore, whole facts are not necessary to be discussed herein. The age of the deceased is also not in dispute. As per the finding of the trial Court, the Maniram was 45 years of age.
(3.) THE only submission of learned Counsel for the appellant is that although this is a case of fatal accident but learned trial Court has applied the multiplier of 10 only, whereas as per second schedule appended to Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, the multiplier of 15 should have been applied, therefore, the amount of compensation may be enhanced accordingly. He also submits that learned trial Court committed an illegality in not awarding the interest on the amount of compensation from the date of suit.;