JUDGMENT : VIJENDER SINGH MALIK, J. 1. This is an appeal brought by the claimants for enhancement of compensation. Neelam died in a road side accident that took place on 24.09.2010. On her death, her husband and her minor daughters have brought a claim petition u/s 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 seeking compensation" in a sum of Rs. 20,00,000/-. The said claim petition has been allowed by learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Rohtak (for short 'the Tribunal') vide award dated 08.08.2011 in a sum of Rs. 5,23,000/-. Neelam had been aged 27 years at the time of her death. She was serving as peon with Deep Arya High School, Kheri Sampla and was getting Rs. 1800/- per month as salary. She was doing tailoring work also and was earning Rs. 3000/- per month. A sum of Rs. 50,000/- was spent on her last rites. She was pregnant and carried a male foetus. 2. Respondent No. 1 has been proceeded against ex-parte in this case. The claim petition has been resisted by the other respondents, who have denied the averments of the claimants regarding age, occupation and income of the deceased. They have denied the claimants to deserve a sum of Rs. 20,00,000/- as compensation. 3. Learned Tribunal took the income of the deceased at Rs. 3000/- per month and then assessed 2/3rd thereof as dependency of the claimants. Taking the annual dependency at Rs. 24,000/-, learned Tribunal applied the multiplier of 17 and assessed a sum of Rs. 4,08,000/- as the loss suffered by the claimants in the death of Neelam. A sum of Rs. 15,000/- was added thereto under the conventional heads. Learned Tribunal took into consideration the fact that the deceased tarried a 28 weeks old male foetus and on account of death of the male foetus, a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- was awarded as compensation in addition to the aforesaid amounts. Thus, a sum of Rs. 5,23,000/- has been assessed as compensation in favour of the claimants. 4. Learned counsel for the appellants has contended that the deceased was earning Rs. 4800/- per month. According to him, Ex. P-4 is the certificate of salary of the deceased. He has further submitted that the deceased was 27 years of age. According to him, she was working as a peon in the school, for which she was getting Rs. 1800/- per month. 4800/- per month. According to him, Ex. P-4 is the certificate of salary of the deceased. He has further submitted that the deceased was 27 years of age. According to him, she was working as a peon in the school, for which she was getting Rs. 1800/- per month. In her spare time, she used to stitch clothes and earned Rs. 3000/- per month. According to him, learned Tribunal was not justified in assessing Rs. 3000/- per month as the income of the deceased. 5. Learned counsel for respondent No. 2, on the other hand, has submitted that salary certificate Ex. P-4 is only to the effect that a sum of Rs. 1800/- per month was being tine salary of the deceased from the school. According to him, there is no evidence to prove that she was earning Rs. 3000/- per month by doing tailoring work. 6. Learned counsel for respondent No. 3 has submitted, on the other hand, that adequate amount has already been assessed as compensation in favour of the claimants. According to her, proper award has already been made and no further enhancement to the compensation is admissible in this case. 7. For tailoring work, it is seldom possible for a person to bring evidence to prove the income therefrom. Tailoring work is done by females without maintaining any record. The deceased had been a part time peon and she could supplement her income by doing tailoring work. However, in the absence of specific evidence, it cannot be believed that the deceased was earning Rs. 3000/- per month by doing the tailoring work. Still, learned Tribunal has assessed the income of the deceased at a very lower side. The income of the deceased can be assessed at Rs. 4000/- per month, which is assessed as services rendered to her family as a housewife. It cannot be believed that the deceased must not be rendering services to the appellants. Therefore, I take the income of the deceased at Rs. 4000/- per month and taking 2/3rd thereof as monthly dependency of the claimants, I reach a sum of Rs. 32,000/- as annual dependency of the claimants, by multiplying that 2/3rd with 12. The multiplier of 17 is available in this case as the death is in the age group of 26 to 30. 4000/- per month and taking 2/3rd thereof as monthly dependency of the claimants, I reach a sum of Rs. 32,000/- as annual dependency of the claimants, by multiplying that 2/3rd with 12. The multiplier of 17 is available in this case as the death is in the age group of 26 to 30. As Neelam died at the age of 27 years, the multiplier of 17 has been rightly adopted by learned Tribunal. Multiplying the annual dependency with 17, I find a sum of Rs. 5,44,000/- to have been lost by the claimants in the death of Neelam. The claimants have lost a male foetus of the age of 28 weeks, for which learned Tribunal has assessed a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- as compensation. I find no reason not to allow the same in this case. Adding the said sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- thereto alongwith a sum of Rs. 20,000/- as compensation under the conventional heads, I find a sum of Rs. 6,64,000/- as compensation payable to the claimants on the death of Neelam. In the result, the appeal succeeds and is allowed enhancing the compensation from Rs. 5,23,000/- to Rs. 6,64,000/- which shall be payable to the appellants by the respondents with interest and under other terms as allowed by the Tribunal. The amount shall be shared by the appellants in equal. The amount of the share of minor appellants No. 2 and 3 shall be deposited in some nationalized bank in fixed deposit for the period till they attained the age of majority.