JUDGMENT : Subhash Samvatsar And S.A.Naqvi, JJ. (1) Present appeal is preferred by the claimants being aggrieved by the award dated 31. 1. 2004 passed by twelfth additional member/judge, motor accidents claims tribunal (fast track court) , gwalior in claim case no. 35 of 2003, whereby the claims tribunal has awarded a sum of rs. 1,20,000 towards compensation for the death of leela sahu. (2) The brief facts of the case are that deceased leela sahu is wife of appellant no. 1 and mother of appellant nos. 2 and (3) On 10. 5. 2002 she was travelling in a tata sumo bearing no. Mp 07 - h 7757. She was going from gwalior to bhopal. Said tata sumo was driven by respondent no. 3, harisingh kushwah, owned by respondent no. 4, vikas sahu and insured with respondent no. 5. The said vehicle met with an accident with a truck bearing no. Mp 07 - 3116, which was owned by respondent no. 1 and was insured with respondent no. 2. Deceased leela sahu was injured in the said accident and died during the treatment due to injuries sustained by her. 3. The claimants filed an application for compensation before the claims tribunal. The claims tribunal while assessing the age of the deceased as 39 years and income on notional basis at rs. 15,000 per year, awarded the aforesaid compensation. (4) The contention of mr. Arun sharma, learned counsel for the appellants is that the amount of compensation awarded by the claims tribunal is on the lower side. While learned counsel appearing for both the insurance companies have supported the award and submitted that the amount of compensation awarded by the claims tribunal is just and proper. (5) The respondent no. 2, i.e., new India assurance co. Ltd. Has also filed cross - objection m. C. P. No. 1560 of 2004 for reduction of compensation on the ground that the driver of the vehicle, which was insured with said insurance company, was not negligent but the driver of other vehicle was negligent and was responsible for the said accident. However, at the time of arguments, the counsel for insurance company does not press the cross - objection. Thus, the only question in the case is about the quantum. (6) Counsel for the appellants submitted that there is ample evidence on record to show that the deceased was earning around rs. However, at the time of arguments, the counsel for insurance company does not press the cross - objection. Thus, the only question in the case is about the quantum. (6) Counsel for the appellants submitted that there is ample evidence on record to show that the deceased was earning around rs. 5,000 to rs. 6,000 per month. Counsel for the appellants invited attention of this court to exhs. P4, p5 and p6. Exh. P4 is the income tax return for the assessment year 2001 - 02. As per exh. P6 the income for the financial year 2001 - 02 is rs. 55,000 and a tax of rs. 500 was payable, which was paid through challan, exh. P5. From the perusal of the documents exhs. P4 and p6, we find that these documents are not beyond suspicion. Firstly because there is no signature of acceptance of these returns by the income tax department. It is true there is a seal showing that the return was received on 30. 7. 2001, but exh. P4 does not show any permanent account number in the return. Even the inward number is missing on both these documents. Considering the above facts, these documents cannot be believed. So far as the deposit of rs. 500 towards income tax is concerned, the said challan also does not bear any account number. Hence, in the absence of specific proof of genuineness of the documents, it cannot be said that deceased was earning rs. 5,000 to rs. 6,000 per month. (7) It has come on record that the deceased was doing stitching and tailoring work but the claimants have not produced any diploma or document in support of this contention. However, there is a statement of husband of deceased that she was doing the business of tailoring and stitching. Considering this fact, we hold that the income of the deceased was rs. 2,500 per month and thus, her annual income will come to rs. 30,000 and the dependency will come to rs. 20,000 per year. Deceased was 39 years of age at the time of accident, hence multiplier of 16 will be applicable and thus, the compensation amount will come to rs. 3,20,000. Apart from the aforesaid amount, another sum of rs. 30,000 is awarded towards funeral expenses, loss of consortium, loss to estate, loss of love and affection, etc. Thus, we award total compensation of rs. 3,20,000. Apart from the aforesaid amount, another sum of rs. 30,000 is awarded towards funeral expenses, loss of consortium, loss to estate, loss of love and affection, etc. Thus, we award total compensation of rs. 3,50,000 (rupees three lakh fifty thousand). Apart from this amount, claimants shall also be entitled to interest on the enhanced compensation at the rate of 7 per cent per annum from the date of filing of the application till its realization. (8) Accordingly, this appeal is allowed to the extent indicated hereinabove and the cross - objection (m. C. P. No. 1560 of 2004) is dismissed as not pressed. Appeal allowed.