(1.) . The appellants, feeling aggrieved by an order dated 25.1.1996 passed by learned MACT, have filed this appeal for enhancement of compensation awarded to them on account of the death of Shri Hans Raj who met with a fatal accident on 10.5.1993. The appellants contend that the learned Trial Judge had not taken into consideration the prospects of future increase in the income of the deceased. They also submit that a higher multiplier ought to have been applied for computing the compensation payable to them.
(2.) . I have heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned counsel for respondent No.3. None appeared for respondents 1 and 2 inspite of notice. I have gone through the records of the case.
(3.) . The appellants in support of their claim had examined the widow of the deceased as PW3 who stated that the deceased was running a cycle repair shop at his residence itself and was earning about Rs.2000.00 per month. She also stated that he was aged about 36 years at the time of his death and gave details of seven young children as well as old parents left behind by the deceased. In her cross examination, she denied that the deceased was not earning Rs.2000/- per month. PW 4 Shri Ved Pal deposed that the income of the deceased was about Rs.2000/ or 2500.00 per month and stated that he used to get his cycle repaired from him. However in his cross examination he stated that it was the deceased only who used to tell him that his income was about Rs.80 per day and as such he took his words as true and had made a statement regarding his income. Learned Trial Judge did not believe the claimants evidence that the income of the deceased was Rs. 2000.00 per month but upon an estimated basis assessed his income at Rs.l500.00 per month. After deducting 1/3 of the income towards the personal expenses of the deceased he assessed the annual financial support to the appellants at Rs.12,000.00 and after applying a multiplier of 14 awarded a compensation of Rs.1,68,000.00 to the appellants.