JUDGMENT Misra, J. -- In this appeal preferred under section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, the claimants-appellants have assailed the award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Katni (in short 'the Tribunal'). The facts which are discernible from the order of the Tribunal are that the deceased, Dalchand was travelling in a bullock cart on 7.7.1995 and a vehicle, a truck bearing registration No. MP-20-0878 dashed against him as a consequence of which he breathed his last. The present appellants who are the dependents instituted the claim case No.41/95. The Tribunal came to hold that the income of the deceased to the family was Rs. 5,400/per year and applied the multiplier of 17 and added a sum of Rs. 15,000/towards consortium and loss of estate. The Tribunal also granted Rs. 2,000/- towards funeral expenses. Thus, in toto, the Tribunal granted Rs. 1,08,800/-. It is worthwhile to mention that the Tribunal granted 12% p.a. interest from the date of the claim petition filed by the claimants. Assailing the aforesaid order, it is submitted by Mr. Anil Lala, learned counsel for the appellants that the Tribunal has grossly erred by coming to hold that the yearly income of the deceased was Rs. 5,400/-. It is urged by him that the deceased was the owner of certain landed property and had a bullock cart and such other ancillary things from which he could earn to sustain his family. It has been putforth by him that he has two children, a wife and parents. Mr. Sanjay Agrawal, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.3, the insurer, has submitted that the Tribunal has correctly fixed the income in the absence of any material on record. It is also putforth by him that the Tribunal has erred by granting 12% p.a. interest and also erred in grant of consortium for loss of status and further higher multiplier has been applied. To appreciate the rival submissions raised at the Bar, we have carefully perused the award passed by the Tribunal. It is noticeable that the Tribunal has fixed the income at Rs. 5,400/- p.m. on the ground that the deceased was earning some income from a bullock cart and also earning a sum of Rs. 1,800/- p.m. from the agricultural property. To appreciate the rival submissions raised at the Bar, we have carefully perused the award passed by the Tribunal. It is noticeable that the Tribunal has fixed the income at Rs. 5,400/- p.m. on the ground that the deceased was earning some income from a bullock cart and also earning a sum of Rs. 1,800/- p.m. from the agricultural property. It has been settled that a man who is engaged for some work his income as per statute has to be determined at Rs. 15,000/- p.a. This factum is not disputed by Mr. S.K. Agrawal. Keeping in view the aforesaid, we are inclined to determine the yearly income of the deceased at Rs. 15,000/-. From the aforesaid, we allow Rs. 5,000/- towards his personal expenses. Thus, his contribution to the family members would be Rs. 10,000/- p.a. As far as the multiplier 17 is concerned, we do not want to disturb the same. Thus, the deceased's legal heirs would get Rs. 10,000 x 17 = 1,70,000/-. As far as consortium is concerned, as the Tribunal has granted Rs. 15,000/-, we also do not intend to deviate from the same. Accordingly, it is included in the award. That apart, Rs. 2,500/- is granted towards funeral expenses. Thus, in toto, the appellants would be entitled to get a sum of Rs. 1,89,500/-. As far as interest is concerned, to keep justness of the award, we are inclined to reduce to 9% from the date of filing of the application. Differential sum shall be deposited by the insurer before the Tribunal within two months from the date of receipt of the order passed today. The appeal is allowed to the extent indicated hereinabove. There shall be no order as to costs.