3.This Court finds no justification in the award. In paragraph 9 of the award, learned Tribunal has considered the evidence adduced by PW3/ Subramani, who has deposed that the deceased was working as a Powerloom weaver and was earning a sum of Rs.10,000/- as monthly income for a period of three years before his death. In addition thereto, Ex.P.8/last drawn salary of the deceased was also produced before the Tribunal. Therefore, the learned Tribunal, having no other option, fixed a sum of Rs.6,750/- as monthly income of the deceased. As per the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sarala Varma and others vs Delhi Transport Corporation and another reported in 2009 (2) TANMAC Volume 2 at Page 1, after arriving a sum of Rs.6,750/- as monthly income, ¼th of the salary was deducted as stated above and applying multiplier 15 towards his personal expenses, since there were 5 family members of the deceased namely wife, 2 minor children, father and mother. Accordingly, it has arrived Rs.5,000/- as monthly income and thereby awarded a sum of Rs.9,00,000/- (5000 x 12 x 15), which, in my view, cannot be found fault with.
