Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:30989 Court No. - 5 Case :- FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER No. - 108 of 2012 Appellant :- Nationla Insurance Co.Ltd Through Its Regional Manager Respondent :- Smt. Geeta Singh And 11 Others Counsel for Appellant :- Ajeet Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- K.P. Singh,Keshav Ram Chaurasia,Manoj Kumar Gupta,Rakesh Kumar Verma Hon'ble Abdul Moin,J. 1. Heard Sri Ajeet Srivastava, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri Manoj Kumar Gupta, learned counsel for the respondents no. 1 to 4. 2. Despite the notice being served on the respondents no. 5, 6 & 10 to 12 vide office report dated 05.02.2020 and on respondents no. 7 to 9 vide office report dated 31.02.2022, nobody has put in appearance on behalf of their behalf. 3. As the matter pertains to the year 2012 as such, the Court proceeds to hear and decide the matter finally. 4. Under challenge is the judgment passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Additional District Judge, Court No. 3, Unnao in M.A.C.P No. 51 of 20078 Inre; Smt. Geeta Singh and Ors Vs. K.C.Sharma and Ors whereby the learned tribunal has awarded an amount of Rs. 7,29,500/- in favour of the claimants. Fifty percent was directed to be paid by the insurance company while the respondents no. 3/1 to 3/6 before the learned tribunal have been directed to pay the balance amount. 5. Only ground as raised by the learned counsel for the appellant- Insurance Company while raising a challenge to the impugned judgment is that despite the age of the deceased being 35 years, the learned tribunal has treated the age to be 30 years and has applied the multiplier accordingly. 6. Sri Gaurav Srivastava, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the claimants fairly states that the age of the deceased was 35 years and accordingly, the multiplier which pertains to the age of 35 years should have been applied by the learned tribunal. It is contended that as per the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of National Insurance Company Ltd Vs. Pranay Sethi and Ors- (2017) 16 SCC 680 wherein the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Sarla Verma Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and Anr- (2009) 6 SCC 121 has been considered it has been held that the multiplier of 16 would be there for the person aged between 31 to 35 years. 7. Considering the age of the deceased being admittedly 35 years accordingly, the multiplier applied by the learned tribunal should have been 16 but the learned tribunal erred in indicating the age of the deceased to be 30 years and has applied a higher multiplier. 8. Considering the aforesaid, the judgment of the learned tribunal is modified to the extent that the multiplier would be read as 16. 9. The appeal is disposed of with the aforesaid direction. 10. The statutory amount would be remitted back to the learned tribunal for being disbursed to the claimants in accordance with law. Order Date :- 21.5.2025 Pachhere/- Digitally signed by :- SATYENDRA SINGH PACHHERE High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench