the non-earning boy would have been considered to be earning Rs.15,000/- per annum in terms of the Second Schedule to the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and a multiplier of 15 should have been applied in respect of the boy. The Apex Court awarded a compensation of Rs.2,25,000/- with interest on such calculation and laid down that the award of compensation had to be made by multiplier method alone. If the principle laid down by the Apex court were to be applied to the facts of the present case, there cannot be any doubt that the appellants will be entitled to much more than the entire compensation of Rs.60,000/- claimed by them before the Tribunal. They did not make any request for considering any higher compensation since the filing of the claim before the Tribunal till now and the parents should have been also justly and adequately compensated under different other heads of damages, pecuniary and non-pecuniary. As rightly contended by them, the mental shock and agony, loss of love and affection, loss of future support and other heads of account also could have been considered, but no further elaboration on such aspects becomes necessary in the light of the appellants’ entitlement to the compensation claimed with reference to the calculation of the compensation by multiplier method under which they would have been entitled to much more than what they claimed.
