Judgment S.N.Pathak, J. 1. This miscellaneous appeal is directed against the judgment dated 29.4.1995 passed by the Addl. District Judge VII, Patna-cum-Claims Tribunal in Claim Case No. 45/13 of 1990/1993. The claimants of the aforesaid case have filed this appeal. 2. The claimants had filed the case in the Claims Tribunal on the allegation that on 4.4.1990 at 4 p.m. the son of Tribani Mahto was knocked down by a speeding truck bearing No. WMK 9345. The Tribunal, on the basis of the evidence adduced before it, granted a compensation amount of Rs. 50,000 to the father of the deceased and his other heirs. Rs. 25,000 were paid as. interim compensation. This compensation amount was directed to be paid by the insurance company which was opposite party No. 2 in the court below and interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum was also allowed from the date of the application till realization. 3. It was submitted before me by the appellants lawyer that the deceased boy was student of class VIII and he had a brilliant academic career and, therefore, claimants should have been allowed compensation amount at much higher rate than the same granted by the Tribunal. In this connection, it was further submitted that even if on the admitted case the deceased boy would be earning Rs. 35 per day as daily wage earner, his monthly income would be Rs. 1,050. This amount having been capitalised at the annual income it would be Rs. 12,600 and using multiplier theory of compensation, the amount of compensation would go much higher than the sum that was granted to the appellants. So, it was prayed that the compensation amount may be enhanced. 4. The death of the minor boy was an admitted fact. A boy of 12 years is not entitled to be employed in any labour work. It is against the law. So there is no question of income of the deceased to be calculated on the basis of income of a daily wage earner. Admittedly, the deceased boy was a student and he was not capable of earning any income. Normally, in such cases a lump sum amount is fixed to be awarded to the deceased. All that is required in such case is that the Tribunal should fix a just and appropriate amount of compensation. Admittedly, the deceased boy was a student and he was not capable of earning any income. Normally, in such cases a lump sum amount is fixed to be awarded to the deceased. All that is required in such case is that the Tribunal should fix a just and appropriate amount of compensation. Second Schedule of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 has stipulated an amount of Rs. 15,000 as annual income of an unemployed youth but this statutory amount has perhaps been fixed for a major youth who is capable of being employed. So, there is no question of calculating income of a minor boy of 12 years either at the rate of daily wage earners income or at the rate of statutory income fixed by the Second Schedule of the aforesaid Act. So a lump sum amount of compensation is to be granted to the heirs of the deceased boy. The Tribunal assessed this amount to be Rs. 50,000. To this amount may be added Rs. 2,000 as funeral expenses and some appropriate amount on account of loss of love and affection sustained by the father and other relations of the deceased boy. In my opinion, this amount should be Rs. 5,000. Thus, the compensation amount could be Rs. 57,000 for the missing opportunity of further prospect on account of death of the deceased may also be fixed. Tribani Mahto described himself to be a farmer. Taking into consideration the status of the family of the deceased a lump sum of Rs. 25,000 in this behalf would be just and proper. So, total compensation for the appellants would be Rs. 82,000. 5. Already, appellants have received Rs. 25,000 as interim compensation. Rest of the amount of Rs. 82,000 is liable to be paid by respondent No. 2 of this appeal (opposite party No. 2 of the case) with interest at the rate of 9 per cent per annum. 6. With the aforesaid modification in the amount of compensation fixed by the Tribunal, this appeal is dismissed.