JUDGMENT : S.G. Mohapatra, J. - claimant is the appellant in this appeal u/s 110-D of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (in short 'the Act'). 2. The owner has not challenged the liability for compensation awarded which is on the basis of the negligent driving. It is, therefore, not open to the owner to challenge the finding of negligence in appeal by the claimant without filing a cross-objection to that effect. Accordingly, the negligent driving of the vehicle which caused the accident resulting in the death of the injured is confirmed. 3. claimant aged 51 years is the mother of the deceased a rickshaw puller aged 22 years. She claimed Rs. 70,000/- as compensation alleging that the monthly income of the deceased was Rs. 350/- per month. The Tribunal has found that the annual contribution is only Rs. 600/- or in other words Rs. 50/- per month. In the absence of any positive evidence where the claimant stated to be fully depending on the earning of her son, there cannot be any higher irrationality than this. If from out of the income of the deceased the claimant was getting even one meal a day the annual contribution cannot be found to be Rs. 600/-only in the year 1976 when the accident occurred. Even if there was no positive evidence in this case, the Tribunal by making a reasonable guess-work could have determined the just compensation which would have been just sufficient for the claimant to fill her stomach. Having held that the determination of compensation by the Tribunal was irrational. I assess the amount to be Rs. l,000/-per year in the minimum. 4. Mr Pujari, the learned Counsel for the appellant submitted that the Tribunal is not justified in computing the compensation for fourteen years. According to him, the recent trend of decisions indicate that the normal longevity is 70 years and the compensation is to be assessed in that light. What would be the longevity would depend on the facts and the circumstances of each case. Longevity of persons would depend upon the class to which the claimant belongs, the average longevity of a female in the family in which the claimant was born and also the average longevity of persons in the area where the claimant was residing. A family of rickshaw Duller can be stated to be below the poverty line. Longevity of persons would depend upon the class to which the claimant belongs, the average longevity of a female in the family in which the claimant was born and also the average longevity of persons in the area where the claimant was residing. A family of rickshaw Duller can be stated to be below the poverty line. There is no material if longevity of such families has increased on account of availability of modern medical facilities or the development of the nation. Reduction of premature mortality would not be a circumstance to come to conclusion that average longevity of adults crossing the huddles of premature mortality has increased. However the normal life span of such class of people can be taken to bs 65 vears even keeping in mind the difference between the longevity of the person of two sexes. Thus, in the absence of any positive evidence, I assess the longevity of the claimant to be 65 years and accordingly, the just compensation is to be determined taking into consideration the annual contribution of Rs. l.OOO/- pe.r year for 14 years, which comes to Rs. 14.000/-. 5. Next comes the question relating to deductions on account of the benefit of lump sura payment and future uncertainty. I am not inclined to make any deduction from the paltry sum of Rs. 14,000/- assessed by me without any statutory compulsion. There is no evidence that the amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal has been paid by the respondent. In case the compensation amount determined in this Court is paid within two monthe from today, it shall carry interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of application till the date of payment. If, however, the amount is not paid within two monthe from today, the entire amount shall carry interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of application till the date of payment. The award relating to the repair of the rickshaw stands confirmed. 6. In the result, the appeal is allowed in part. There shall, however, be no order as to costs in this appeal.