Judgment Jitendra Ray Goyal, J.-A minor boy, Avinash aged about nine months, died in an accident which occurred on 30.11.2001, when he was sitting with Dinesh under a tree nearby Koyala Bus stand, Jaipur-Gangapur road, one Jeep bearing registration No. RJ-34/P-0249, driven by respondent No. 1 Ramotar, rashly and negligently, hit both Dinesh and Avinash, as a result of which Dinesh and Avinash both sustained serious injuries and Avinash died at the spot. 2. Claimant-appellant filed a Claim Petition No. 6/2002 before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (hereinafter to be referred as Tribunal), Gangapur city. 3. Respondents No. 1 to 3 filed reply and denied their liability while the respondent No. 4 the National Insurance Company Ltd. also filed reply and stated that driver was not possessing valid license and the Jeep was not being used for the purpose it was insured, hence denied its liability in toto. 4. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the learned Tribunal framed issues for consideration and after recording the evidence of the parties awarded a compensation to the tune of Rs. 1,00,000/-. 5. Aggrieved from the award on the ground of inadequacy, the present appeal has been preferred by the claimant-appellants. 6. I have heard learned Counsel for the parties and have gone through the Judgment of the learned Tribunal. Learned Counsel for the appellants contended that learned Tribunal did not consider the amount of compensation for pecuniary and non-pecuniary loss. It was also contended that the Tribunal did not award any amount incurred in funeral expenses and also not awarded any amount in the head of physical pain, suffering and mental agony and further at least on the basis of notional income of Rs. 15,000/-per annum after adopting the proper multiplier compensation should have been determined. Reliance has been placed upon the Judgment rendered by the Honble Supreme Court in the case of Shanti Bai & Ors. vs. Charan Singh & Ors., reported in 1998 ACJ 848. 7. Learned Counsel for the respondents supported the impugned award and contended that learned Tribunal after taking into consideration entire facts and circumstances of the case rightly awarded the compensation which does not call for any interference. 8. I have considered the rival contentions advanced before me on behalf of the parties. It is not disputed that deceased Avinash died in the fateful accident. 8. I have considered the rival contentions advanced before me on behalf of the parties. It is not disputed that deceased Avinash died in the fateful accident. Learned Tribunal also arrived at the conclusion that accident took place due to negligence of the driver of the Jeep bearing registration No. RJ-34/P-0249. 9. Honble the Supreme Court in the case of Shanti Bai & Others case (Supra), under the similar circumstances in an accidental death of a child enhanced the compensation amount from Rs. 40,000/-to Rs. 1,50,000/-in lump sum. In the instant case the deceased Avinash was a minor aged about nine months, had he survived he would have earned substantial amount per month for the benefit of his family. Considering his future economic prospects and all other circumstances in the light of the Judgment rendered by the Honble Apex Court in the case as referred above, I deem it fit to enhance the award of compensation to a lump sum amount of Rs. 1,50,000/-instead of Rs. 1,00,000/-as awarded by the Tribunal. 10. Consequently, the appeal is allowed accordingly and the compensation amount is enhanced to the tune of Rs. 1,50,000/-from Rs. 1,00,000/-. The appellants are also entitled to interest at the rate of 6% per annum on the enhanced amount from the date of filing the claim application till payment is made.