land, which was an extent of about 2.75 crores. The learned counsel appearing for the claimants argues that the Tribunal did not take into account the loss of managerial skills of the deceased for his operation in agricultural land and took the income of the deceased at Rs.2500/-. He had a large family of six persons to support and it is inconceivable that a person could have carried on comfortably in his life owning agricultural land also earning just Rs.2500/-. I do not find the assumption of income by his tuition itself to be inappropriate but the Tribunal ought to have taken note of the fact that the deceased was admittedly owning 2.75 acres of land and I would estimate the loss arisen due to managerial skills of the deceased at Rs.15,000/- per year for property around 3 acres. The income from his tuition, I would enhance it from Rs.2500/- per month to Rs.3,000/-. In all, the actual income of the deceased could be taken as Rs.51,000/- per year. Instead of providing for 1/3rd deduction for personal expenses, having regard to the large size of the family, I would provide for a lesser deduction of 1/5th and take the contribution to the family as Rs.40,800/-. He was aged 40 years and I would apply a multiplier of 15. The amount payable would be Rs.6,12,000/-. The deceased had a prolonged treatment before his death, he having been paralyzed beneath his neck due to spinal injuries. The Tribunal had already assessed the claim for medical expenses for Rs.2 lacs. This amount shall also be added and that would make the compensation at Rs.8,11,000/-. I would add the conventional heads to round it off to Rs.8,25,000/-. The Tribunal has already awarded Rs.5,20,000/- and the amount i.e. now
