Hon'ble RAFIQ, J.—These two appeals have been filed by claimants, one of whom namely Smt. Anguri Devi has died during the pendency of the appeal. 2. The appeal No.312/07 is arising out of the death claim of mother of the appellant. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant has relied on the judgment of Supreme Court in Lata Wadhwa vs. State of Bihar : (2001) 8 SCC 197 and argued that Supreme Court in those cases held that when there is no evidence of income in the case of death of a household wife, her income has to be accepted at a minimum of Rs.3,000 on the analogy that her contribution to the family is not less than any earning male member. 4. Learned counsel argued that in the case of Laxmi Devi & Ors. vs. Mohammad Tabbar & Anr.: 2008 (2) TAC 394 (SC) 2008(4) RLW 3370 (SC), the Supreme Court observed that notional income of 15,000/- as indicated in Second Schedule to the Motor Vehicles Act should have been enhanced and taken at Rs.36,000 because since the notional income of Rs.15,000 was prescribed in the Second Schedule in 1994, no amendment has been made therein so far. The income of the deceased in the present case has been accepted at Rs.2,500 per month, whereas the evidence of the claimants proved that she was working in a photo studio and was earning Rs.5,000 per month, therefore, it is also justified that her income may be accepted at least as Rs.3,000 per month in the year 2004 when the accident took place. 5. The another appeal no.235/07 arising out of death claim of minor child. Learned counsel for the appellant has argued that in the present case, the compensation of Rs.2,25,000 has been awarded, however, this Court in Smt. Nana Devi & Ors. vs. Gurumel Singh & Ors., S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No.870/2001 decided on 2.11.2011 enhanced the compensation to be awarded to the claimants in accidental death of the children aged 10-15 years to Rs.2,50,000. 6. Shri Tripurari Sharma, learned counsel for the respondent opposed the appeals and argued that Supreme Court in Ponnumany & Anr. vs. V.A. Mohanan & Ors.- 2008 ACJ 1338 has held that when there is no proof of income, income should be accepted on notional basis at Rs.15,000 per annum. No deviation can be made in the case of household wife. 7. vs. V.A. Mohanan & Ors.- 2008 ACJ 1338 has held that when there is no proof of income, income should be accepted on notional basis at Rs.15,000 per annum. No deviation can be made in the case of household wife. 7. In the case of death of minor child aged 15 years, who was younger brother of the appellant, learned counsel argued that appellant Vandana who is the elder sister of the child, cannot be said to be dependent on him The appeal be therefore dismissed. 8. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, I find that appellant is justified in contending on the basis of aforesaid judgement of Supreme Court in Lata Wadhwa, supra that even if it is accepted to be a case of household wife, her contribution to the family has to be assessed to the extent of Rs.3,000 per month. In the present case, the claimant has asserted that deceased was working at a photo video and was earning a sum of Rs.5,000 per month. In the present case therefore the monthly income is taken at Rs.3,000 per month and on that basis applying the multiplier of 17 on the age of 35 years, the compensation is computed after deducting 1/3rd towards self expenses at Rs. 4,08,000 (Rs.3000x2/3 = 2000x17x12). The compensation granted under other non-pecuniary heads is however maintained. The amount of compensation thus comes to Rs.4,30,000 (4,08,000 + 10,000 + 10,000 + 2,000). The amount of compensation is thus enhanced from Rs.3,62,000 to Rs.4,30,000. The appellant is also entitled to interest @ 7.5% per annum on the enhanced amount of compensation. 9. The appeal no.312/07 is therefore allowed. 10. However, in the case of minor child, who was younger brother of the claimant, no case is made out for enhancement. The appeal no.235/07 is therefore dismissed.