JUDGMENT : G. P. Mittal, J. 1. The Appeal is for enhancement of compensation of Rs. 5,81,320/- awarded for the death of Sat Narayan who suffered fatal injuries in a motor accident which occurred on 08.06.2007. 2. In the absence of any Cross Objections/Cross Appeal by the driver, the owner and the Insurer, the finding on negligence reached by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (the Claims Tribunal) has attained finality. My task is simply to see that the compensation awarded is just and reasonable or not. 3. The Appellants’ grievance is that the deceased Sat Narayan was working as a Commission Agent in Naya Bazar. He had an income of Rs. 10,000/- to Rs. 11,000/- per month. The Claims Tribunal erred in rejecting the First Appellant’s testimony with regard to the deceased’s income and deciding the petition on the basis of the Minimum Wages fixed by the Govt. of NCT of Delhi under the Minimum Wages Act, 1948. 4. Deceased Sat Narayan was working as a Commission Agent with one Pramod Kumar in Naya Bazar. The Appellant Maya Devi filed her Affidavit Ex.PW-1/A testifying the deceased’s income to be Rs. 10,000/- to Rs. 11,000/- per month. In cross-examination, she deposed that she was not aware if her husband was an income tax payee or not. She admitted that she had a bank account but she was not depositing any money therein. She denied the suggestion that her husband was not even earning Rs. 2,000/- per month. 5. PW-2 Sunil Kumar owner of a Dal Mill in the name and style of Krishna Food Traders, deposed that the deceased was carrying out the task of weighing food items/pulses on order from the Dal Mill owners. He deposed that his brother Pramod used to get the pulses weighed through the deceased. He testified that he had no knowledge as to what the deceased used to charge as the weighing charges. 6. Pramod Gupta for whom the deceased was working has not been produced in the Court. The Claims Tribunal, therefore, took the minimum wages of an unskilled worker, added 50% towards inflation, deducted one-third towards the personal and living expenses and applied the multiplier of ‘13’ to compute the loss of dependency as per Sarla Verma & Ors. v. Delhi Transport Corporation & Anr., (2009) 6 SCC 121 . 7. The Claims Tribunal, therefore, took the minimum wages of an unskilled worker, added 50% towards inflation, deducted one-third towards the personal and living expenses and applied the multiplier of ‘13’ to compute the loss of dependency as per Sarla Verma & Ors. v. Delhi Transport Corporation & Anr., (2009) 6 SCC 121 . 7. In the absence of any cogent evidence with regard to the deceased’s income, the Claims Tribunal’s finding to compute the loss of dependency on an assumed income of Rs. 5200/- per month cannot be faulted. 8. The Appeal is devoid of any merit; the same is accordingly dismissed. 9. Pending applications also stand disposed of.