at-least 1/4th ought to have been deducted towards personal living expenses of deceased whereas the Tribunal has deducted 1/3rd towards it which is not justified in view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Sarla Verma ( supra ) and Santosh Devi ( supra ). Accordingly, after deducting 1/4th i.e. Rs.1,03,194/-, the remaining i.e. Rs.3,09,582/comes to as annual loss of dependency of the Appellants/Claimants. In addition, as the age of the deceased was about 32-35 years at the time of his death on account of the vehicular accident in question therefore as per the law laid down by the Supreme Court in Sarla Verma (s upra ), a multiplier of 16 will have to be applied for computing the total loss of dependency while the Tribunal has applied the multiplier of 17 which is on a higher side. Thus, by applying multiplier of 16, the total loss of dependency comes to Rs.49,53,312/- (3,09,582x16) which after deducting 50% towards contributory negligence comes to Rs.24,76,656/-. In addition to this, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal to the conventional heads is also on a very low side. In the opinion of this Court ends of justice would meet if the Appellants/Claimants are granted a lump sum amount of Rs.50,000/- towards conventional heads instead of Rs.9,500/- (i.e., Rs.5000/- towards loss of consortium + Rs.2000/- as funeral expenses + Rs.2500/- for loss of estate) which has been awarded by the Tribunal. As such, the Appellants/Claimants shall be entitled to a total compensation of Rs.25,26,656/- with interest thereon.
