Judgment Rajeev Gupta, C.J. This is claimants' appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal 1 District Judge, Udham Singh Nagar at Rudrapur vide Award dated 20-06-2007 passed in Motor Accident Claim Petition No. 92 of 2006. 2. The claimants Ishwari Dutt Joshi and Smt. Mathura Devi - the unfortunate parents of deceased Suresh Chandra Joshi - claimed compensation of Rs. 15,00,0001- for his death in the motor accident on 25-02-2006, when the motor-cycle on which he was traveling as a pillion rider, was dashed by the offending vehicle jeep bearing registration No. UA08B-9911, resulting in multiple serious injuries to claimants' son Suresh Chandra Joshi, who succumbed to those injuries on the spot. The claimants further pleaded that their son Suresh Chandra Joshi was aged about 22 years and was earning 8,000/- per month from his shop and cultivation. 3. The respondents contested the claim and denied their liability to pay compensation to the claimants on the ground that the motor-cyclist himself was responsible for the accident and there was no negligence on the part of the jeep driver. 4. The claimants examined PW 11 shwari Dutt Joshi and PW2 Vinod Rajput in support of their claim, whereas the respondents examined DW1 Const. Prem Ballabh in rebuttal. 5. The Tribunal, on a close scrutiny of the evidence led by the parties, held that claimants' son Suresh Chandra Joshi died on account of the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 25-02-2006; the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle jeep; and the respondents being the owner of the offending vehicle jeep were liable to pay compensation to the claimants. 6. As the Tribunal did not find the evidence led by the claimants about the income of the deceased reliable, his income was assessed at Rs. 15,000/- per annum on the basis of the notional income prescribed in Second Schedule U/s 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act. The Tribunal assessed dependency of the claimants at Rs. 15,000/- per annum. By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs. 15,000/- with the multiplier of 10, the compensation was worked out to Rs. 1,50,000/-. In Addition, the Tribunal awarded further sum of Rs. 2,0001- towards funeral expenses. Thus, a total sum of Rs. The Tribunal assessed dependency of the claimants at Rs. 15,000/- per annum. By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs. 15,000/- with the multiplier of 10, the compensation was worked out to Rs. 1,50,000/-. In Addition, the Tribunal awarded further sum of Rs. 2,0001- towards funeral expenses. Thus, a total sum of Rs. 1,52,000/- was awarded as compensation to the claimants for the death of their son Suresh Chandra Joshi in the motor accident. The Tribunal further directed the respondents to pay interest @ 7% per annum on the amount of compensation of Rs. 1,52,0001- from the date of the filing of the claim petition till the date of payment. 7. Sri H.M. Bhatia, the learned counsel for the appellants vehemently argued that the Tribunal has erred in discarding the claimants' evidence about the income of the deceased and in assessing his income at Rs. 15,000/- per annum only on the basis of the notional income and in awarding low compensation of Rs. 1,52,000/- only. 8. Sri Ashish Joshi, the learned Brief Holder for the respondents, on the other hand, supported the impugned Award and contended that the compensation of Rs. 1,52,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the case. 9. The findings recorded by the Tribunal that deceased Suresh Chandra Joshi died on account of the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 25-02-2006 and that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle jeep have, now, attained finality as the respondents have not filed any appeal against the Award. Even otherwise, there is sufficient evidence on record in support of the above' findings recorded by the Tribunal. We, therefore, uphold the above findings recorded by the Tribunal. 10. True, the claimants pleaded that deceased Suresh Chandra Joshi used to earn Rs. 8,000/- per month from his shop and cultivation. The evidence led by the claimants in that behalf is not of clinching nature. In this state of evidence, the Tribunal was left with no other option but to assess the income of the deceased on its own estimate. In doing so, the Tribunal has placed reliance on the notional income prescribed in the Second Schedule U/s 163-Aof the Motor Vehicles Act. 11. The notional income of Rs. In this state of evidence, the Tribunal was left with no other option but to assess the income of the deceased on its own estimate. In doing so, the Tribunal has placed reliance on the notional income prescribed in the Second Schedule U/s 163-Aof the Motor Vehicles Act. 11. The notional income of Rs. 15,000/- in the Second Schedule U/s 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act was prescribed in the year 1994. The deceased lost his life in the motor accident in the year 2006. If the increase in the Price-Index of the essential commodities and the cost of living during the period between 1994 and 2006 is taken into account, the notional income of Rs. 15,000/- prescribed in the year 1994 would in the year 2006 come to Rs. 36,000/- per annum. We, therefore, propose to recomputed the compensation taking the income of the deceased at Rs. 36,000/- per annum. 12. By deducting 1/3rd of Rs. 36,000/- as the personal expenses of the deceased, the claimants' dependency comes to Rs. 24,000/- per annum. The multiplier selected by the Tribunal is perfectly in line with the dictum of the Apex Court in the case of Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay Vs. Laxman Iyer and another reported in (2003) 8 SCC 731 wherein it has been held that in those cases where the claimants are parents, the multiplier should never exceed '10'. 13. By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs. 24,000/- with the multiplier of '10', the compensation works out to Rs. 2,40,000/-. The claimants are further entitled to Rs. 5,000/ - towards funeral expenses and Rs. 5,000/- towards loss of estate. Thus, the claimants become entitled to receive total sum of Rs. 2,50,000/- for the death of their son Suresh Chandra Joshi in the motor accident on 25-02-2006. 14. The claimants are further entitled to interest @ 7% per annum on the above amount of compensation of Rs. 2,50,000/-. 15. For the foregoing reasons, the appeal filed by the appellants for enhancement of the compensation is allowed in part. The compensation of Rs. 1,52,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced to Rs. 2,50,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Fifty Thousand only). This amount of Rs. 2,50,000/- shall carry interest @ 7% per annum from the date of the claim petition i.e. 07-04-2006 till the date of actual payment. The compensation of Rs. 1,52,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced to Rs. 2,50,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Fifty Thousand only). This amount of Rs. 2,50,000/- shall carry interest @ 7% per annum from the date of the claim petition i.e. 07-04-2006 till the date of actual payment. The enhanced amount of compensation and the interest thereon shall be apportioned between appellants 1 and 2 in the same ratio as directed in the impugned Award. 16. The amount of compensation and interest, if any, deposited by the respondents before the Tribunal in satisfaction of the Award shall be given due adjustment by the concerning claims Tribunal. 17. No order as to costs.