have preferred the present appeal being the wife, two minor children and parents of the deceased, Sanwat Ram (hereinafter referred to as the “Deceased”), who died in a road accident which took place on 15.06.2000, on account of rash and negligent driving by MANOJ KUMAR 2026.03.27 17:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document respondent No. 3 while driving TATA 407 bearing registration No.HR-38- 1018. 3. Being aggrieved by the impugned award dated 11.10.2004 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Narnaul (hereinafter referred to as “Tribunal”), vide which the appellants-claimants were found entitled to total compensation of Rs.2,35,200/-, the appellants-claimants are seeking enhancement of compensation awarded by the Tribunal as the same is not according to their entitlement. 4. Cross-objector, Vinod Kumar, the registered owner of vehicle bearing No. HR-38-1018, which was held to be the offending vehicle by the learned Tribunal while recording findings on Issue No. 1, has filed the present cross-objection challenging the manner of accident and fastening of liability upon him by the learned Tribunal. 5. MANOJ KUMAR 2026.03.27 17:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document The cross-objector, Vinod Kumar, asserted that he had duly sold the offending vehicle and, in support of his case, appeared as RW-1. It was his specific stand that the vehicle bearing No. HR-38-1018 had been sold to respondent No.1A-Kundan Lal. He deposed that after receiving the entire sale consideration, he had handed over the possession, along with management and control of the vehicle, to the purchaser, respondent No.1A-Kundan Lal, on 03.12.1998. He further stated that he had executed a sale letter and also submitted an application for transfer of ownership before the Registration Authority. 10. MANOJ KUMAR 2026.03.27 17:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document MANOJ KUMAR 2026.03.27 17:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 13. From the above-noted evidence, it is clearly established that although the cross-objector, Vinod Kumar, continued to be the registered owner of the offending vehicle bearing No. HR-38-1018, he had, in fact, sold the same and transferred its possession as well as control to respondent No.1A-Kundan La MANOJ KUMAR 2026.03.27 17:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 17. The Tribunal in the present case had awarded the following compensation: Monthly Income Rs.2,100/- Deduction 1/3rd Multiplier 14 Total compensation awarded Rs.2,35,200/- (Rs.1400 x 12 x 14) 18. Appellants-claimants have sought enhancement of compensation on the ground that income of deceased was not correctly taken by learned Tribunal and future prospects were not added. That deduction was wrongly applied in view of number of dependents. Award of multiplier of ‘14’ by learned Tribunal is also under challenge. Appellants-claimants have also sought appropriate compensation for loss of estate, funeral expenses and loss of consortium. On the other hand, insurance company and cross objector have also challenged quantum of compensation being excessive. 19. Learned Tribunal has assessed the income of the deceased to be Rs.2,100/- per month. Appellants-claimants had claimed that deceased was working as transporter and was earning Rs.6,000/- per month. However, except MANOJ KUMAR 2026.03.27 17:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document for oral assertions, no cogent documentary evidence that deceased was working as a transporter and was earning Rs.6,000/- per month was produced. Appellants-claimants have therefore failed to prove vocation and income of deceased as pleaded by the appellants-claimants. In absence of any evidence the income taken by the learned Tribunal, on the basis of minimum wages is maintained. Accordingly, the income of the deceased is taken as Rs. 2,100/- per month. Admittedly, as per claim petition deceased was aged 25 years and is survived by his wife, two minor children and parents i.e. appellants- claimants No. 1 to 5. The appellants-claimants shall therefore, be entitled to addition of future prospects to the extent of 40% for determining loss of dependency. Keeping in view the age of the deceased as 25 years, multiplier of ‘18’ would be appropriate for the purpose of determining loss of dependency as per the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Smt. Sarla Verma & Ors. Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation & Anr., 2009 (6) SCC 121. Since deceased is survived by five dependents i.e. wife, parents and two minor children, deduction of 1/4th ought to be made towards personal expenses. Appellants-claimants shall also be entitled to Rs.7,500/- each under the head loss of estate, funeral expenses and Rs. 15,000/- each under the head spousal, parental and filial consortium. 20. Accordingly, the reworked compensation to which the appellants-claimants are entitled to is as under: Income Rs.2,100/- per month Rs.2,100/- per month Future Prospects 40% (2100+840) Rs.2,940/- Deduction 1/4th (2940-735) Rs.2,205/- Multiplier 18 18 Total loss of dependency Rs.2,205 x 12x18 Rs.4,76,280/- MANOJ KUMAR 2026.03.27 17:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Loss of Estate Rs.7,500/- Funeral Expenses Rs.7,500/- Loss of Spousal Consortium to claimant No. 1 Rs.15,000/- Loss of Parental consortium to claimant nos. 2 & 3 Rs.15,000/- x 2 Rs.30,000/- Loss of filial consortium to claimant Nos. 4 & 5 Rs.15,000x2 Rs.30,000/- Total Compensation awarded in appeal Rs.5,66,280/- Total Compensation awarded by the Tribunal Rs.2,35,200/- Enhanced amount of compensation Rs.5,66,280/- (as awarded in appeal) Rs.2,35,200/- (as awarded by the Tribunal) Rs.3,31,080/- 21. Appellants-claimants shall also be entitled to interest @ 7.5% on the enhanced compensation from the date of filing of claim petition till realization. Apportionment and liability of respondents to pay compensation shall be as per the award. 22. In view of the above discussion, the award passed by the Tribunal is modified and the present appeal preferred by claimants stands allowed accordingly. 23. Cross-objections being XOBJC-82-CII-2008 in FAO-4786-2005 filed are disposed of with right to cross objector-registered owner recover any amount paid to claimants with interest from respondent No.1A namely Kundal Lal and driver-Satbir Singh. MANOJ KUMAR 2026.03.27 17:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document