9.Admittedly, the deceased Marishwar Raj was a B.E. student, studying final year. Since he was a student, the Tribunal has fixed only a sum of Rs.7,500/- as monthly income. We are of the opinion that since the deceased was a Engineering Student and on completion of studies, he would have got a good job fetching good income not less than Rs.20,000/- per month. In fact, in an identical situation, this aspect was taken note of by the Division Bench in the aforementioned decision and fixed Rs.20,000/- as notional income. Hence, we are inclined to follow the above referred decision in the present case also. We are of the opinion that it would be appropriate to fix a sum of Rs.20,000/- as monthly income of the deceased to arrive at a just and proper compensation. In the instant case, at the time of accident, the deceased was aged 20 years. Hence, the correct multiplier that has to be applied is 18. If the monthly income of the deceased is taken as Rs.20,000/-, then 40% amount has to be added towards future prospects and if so added, the total comes to Rs.28,000/- (20,000 + 8,000). If 50% amount is deducted towards personal expenses, the monthly loss of dependency comes to Rs.14,000/-. Then, the total loss of dependency works out to Rs.30,24,000/- (14,000 x 12 x 18). Hence, the compensation amount of Rs.8,10,000/- awarded by the Tribunal under the head of loss of dependency is hereby modified and enhanced to Rs.30,24,000/-.
