above Bus on the date of the accident was insured with the United india Insurance Company Limited, and the Insurance Company could not establish any breach of the policy conditions, the Insurance Company was liable to pay 70% of the compensation assessed to the claimants. 4) The Tribunal assessed the income of the deceased at Rs 1,200/- per month. By deducting 1/3” of Rs.1 ,200/— towards the personalexpenses of the deceased, the claimants’ dependency , 7 was assessed at Rs.800/— per month and Rs.9,600/- per annum. Bylmultiplying the annual dependency of Rs.9,600/— with the multiplier of 10, th‘e compensation was worked out to Rs.96,000/—. By lawarding further sum of Rs.7,000/— under other heads, the I Tribunal assessed the total compensation at Rs.1 ,03,000/-. As the driver of the Bus was held responsible for the accident to the extent of 70%, the Tribunal directed the insurer of the Bus to pay 70% of Rs.1 ,03,000/— i.e. Rs.72,100/— as compensation to the claimants for the death of deceased Tijuram in the motor accident. The Tribunal further directed payment of interest on the above amount of compensation of Rs.72,100/- @ 9% per annum from the date of tiling of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 5) Shri Ashok Kumar Shukla and Shri Atanu Ghosh, learned counsel for the appellants submitted that though the Tribunal has rightly held that deceased Tijuram was also responsible for the accident to the extent of 3t)%, it has erred in assessing the income of the deceased at Rs.1,20(0/per month.\only; in selecting the
