JUDGMENT P.K. Jaiswal, J. 1. This appeal is filed by the claimants under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 for enhancement of compensation against the award dated 18th July, 2008 passed by Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Indore in Claim Case No. 21 of 2007 whereby, learned Claims Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 5,45,977/- as compensation. 2. The other findings pertaining to involvement of the vehicle and liability of Insurance Company are not in dispute. 3. It is submitted by learned Counsel for the Appellants that on the date of accident, the deceased was working as Forest Guard and his salary was Rs. 5,205/- per month. The DPF amount of Rs. 400/- and GIS amount of Rs. 100/- were wrongly deducted by the Claims Tribunal while computing the income of the deceased. It is further contended that as per Exhibit P/2, the salary sheet, the deceased was getting Rs. 5,205/- per month. This fact is supported by statement of Mr. Jagdish Dubey (AW-1). The said witness in para 2 of his statement has very categorically stated that at the time of death, 32 years service period of deceased was left and he would have been promoted up to the post of Dy. Ranger. It is also not in dispute that after Sixth pay Commission, the salary was revised w.e.f. 1st January, 2006. After revision of pay-scale, salary of Forest Guard is approximately 11,000/- to 12,000/- per month. In the case of Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transport Corporation, 2009 ACJ 1298 : 2009 (2) T.A.C. 672, the Apex Court after considering the case of General Manager, Kerala State Road Transport Corpn. v. Susamma Thomas, 1994 ACJ 1 : 1994 (1) T.A.C. 323, observed that an addition of 50 per cent of actual salary to the actual salary income of the deceased towards future prospects, where the deceased had a permanent job and was below 40 years. The addition should be only 30 percent if the age of the deceased was 40 to 50 years. There should be no addition where the age of the deceased is more than 50 years. Where the deceased was self-employed or was on a fixed salary (without provision for annual increments, etc.), the Courts will usually take only the actual income at the time of death. 4. There should be no addition where the age of the deceased is more than 50 years. Where the deceased was self-employed or was on a fixed salary (without provision for annual increments, etc.), the Courts will usually take only the actual income at the time of death. 4. Learned Counsel for the Appellants also contended that when actual figures as to what would be the income in future, are available it is not proper to take a nominal hypothetical increase of only 50 per cent for calculating the income. He submitted that though the deceased was receiving Rs. 5,205/- per month at the time of death, as per the certificate issued by the employer, on the basis of pay revision and increases, his salary would have been Rs. 10,000/- in the year 2006 i.e. on 1st January, 2006. As per Sixth Pay Commission, the salary was revised from the said cut off date and there is no reason as to why the said amount should not be considered as income of the deceased. 5. Relying on the principle enunciated by the Apex Court in the case of Sarla Verma (supra), I am of the view that an addition of 50 percent of salary to the actual salary income of the deceased towards future prospects. 6. On the other hand, learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent, Insurance Company drew my attention to the cross-objection filed by the Insurance Company and submitted that the amount awarded by the Claims Tribunal is on the higher side. He submitted that in view of the decision of Apex Court in the case of Sarla Verma (Supra), in regard to bachelors, normally 50 per cent is deducted as personal and living expenses because it is assumed that a bachelor would tend to spend more on himself. Even otherwise, there is also the possibility of his getting married in a short time, in which event, the contribution to the parents is likely to be cut drastically. Thus, even if the deceased is survived by parents and siblings, only the mother would be considered to be a dependent and 50 per cent would be treated as the personal and living expenses of the bachelor and 50 per cent as the contribution to the family. Thus, even if the deceased is survived by parents and siblings, only the mother would be considered to be a dependent and 50 per cent would be treated as the personal and living expenses of the bachelor and 50 per cent as the contribution to the family. The Apex Court has further observed that where the deceased has a widowed mother and large number of younger non-earning brothers and sisters, his personal and living expenses may be restricted to one third and contribution to the family will be taken as two third. 7. In the case of National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Gurumallamma, 2009 ACJ 2660 : 2009 (3) T.A.C. 1006, the Apex Court deducted one third towards personal and living expenses of the deceased who was bachelor at the time of accident. 8. In the case of Bilkish v. United India Insurance Co. Ltd., 2008 A.C.J. 1357 : 2008 (2) T.A.C. 815, the deceased was a student of B. Com. First Year and was doing business, the Apex Court deducted one third of his total income towards personal and living expenses. 9. After appreciating the arguments of learned Counsel for the Appellants, this Court is of the view that 50 per cent can be added to the actual salary by taking note of future prospects. It is not in dispute that monthly income of the deceased was Rs. 5,205/-. After adding 50 per cent for calculating the future income, the total income comes to Rs. 7,800/- per month i.e. Rs. 93,600/- per annum. After deducting 1/3rd towards personal and living expenses of the deceased, the loss of dependency comes to Rs. 62,400/- (Rs. 93,600-31,200/- = Rs. 62,400/-) per annum. On applying the multiplier of 11, it comes to Rs. 6,86,400/- (Six Lakhs Eighty Six thousand Four Hundred). 10. As per Exhibit P/23 to P/125, it is clear that Appellants spent a sum of Rs. 1,53,962/- on medical treatment of the deceased. Learned Claims Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 1,07,437/- on the ground that out of total bill amount, the Appellants also added the amount of Rs. 46,425/- which was paid by them as an advance from time to time. As the advance amount has been deducted, therefore, taking into account the advance paid by the Appellants, the total amount of medical expenses comes to Rs. 1,22,000/- (One Lakh Twenty Two Thousand). 46,425/- which was paid by them as an advance from time to time. As the advance amount has been deducted, therefore, taking into account the advance paid by the Appellants, the total amount of medical expenses comes to Rs. 1,22,000/- (One Lakh Twenty Two Thousand). No amount has been awarded towards transportation charges, special diet and charges for attendants. A sum of Rs. 18,000/- (Eighteen Thousand) would be just and proper on the above heads. In other heads such as funeral expenses, loss of love and affection, etc, in the opinion of this Court, a sum of Rs. 25,000/- (Twenty Five Thousand) would be just and proper. Thus, the total amount of compensation comes to Rs. 8,51,400/- (Eight Lakhs Fifty one Thousand Four Hundred) (6,86,400 + 1,22,000/- + 18,000/- + 25,000/ - 8,51,400/-). After deducting the amount of 5,45,977/- already awarded by the Claimants Tribunal, the enhanced amount would be Rs. 3,05,423/ - (Three Lakhs Five Thousand Four Hundred Twenty Three). This enhanced amount shall also carry interest @ 7.5 per cent per annum from the date of the award till its actual realisation. 11. In view of the above, I allow this appeal to the extent indicated hereinabove, but without any order as to costs.