Satish Chandra,J. Present appeal for the enhancement of the compensation under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 has been preferred by the appellant - claimant against the judgment and award dated 05.09.2009 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Lakhimpur Kheri in Motor Accident Claim Case No.71 of 2008 (Smt. Santosh Kumari and another vs. Rajiv Kumar and another). 2. Brief facts of the case are that on 07.02.2008 at about 1.30 p.m., Sri Manoj Kumar was coming back to his house after Darshan of Devkali Temple on his cycle. A Truck No.U.P. 31-A 1427 was coming behind him. The Truck dashed him. Sri Manoj Kumar had fallen down and died on the spot. The deceased was aged about 17 years and a student of Class IX. Immediately, FIR was lodged. The parents of the deceased have filed a Claim Petition before the Tribunal, who after considering the entire evidence, awarded a compensation of Rs.1,32,000/- along with interest @6% per annum against the insurance company - opposite party no.2. Still not being satisfied, the appellants-claimants have filed the present appeal for the enhancement of the compensation. 3. With this background, Sri Shashank Singh, learned counsel for the appellants submit that the compensation is meager one. The notional income of the deceased was taken @Rs.15000/- per annum and multiplier has wrongly been applied by taking the age of the parents. For the purpose, he relied on the ratio laid down in the case of Laxmi Devi and others vs. Mohammad Tabbar and Another (2008) 12 SCC 165 . Finally, he made a request to enhance the compensation suitably. 4. On the other hand, Sri Dharmendra Singh, learned counsel for the vehicle owner submits that liability lies on the insurance company with whom the Truck was insured. 5. At the same time, Sri Ved Prakash, learned counsel for the Insurance Company has justified the impugned order. 6. After hearing the parties and on perusal of record, it appears that the accident is undisputed, where the deceased died on the spot. He was about 17 years of old and a student of Class IX. As he was more than 14 years of age, so, there is no legal bar for his employment. It is claimed by the appellants - claimants that he was assisting his father in agricultural work. He was about 17 years of old and a student of Class IX. As he was more than 14 years of age, so, there is no legal bar for his employment. It is claimed by the appellants - claimants that he was assisting his father in agricultural work. So, notional income will have to be taken as per the ratio laid down in the case of Laxmi Devi (supra) @Rs.3000/- per month. The deceased was a bachelor. So the average age of the parents will have to be taken as per the ratio laid down in the case of Laxmi Devi (Supra). Further, in the case of Amrit Bhanu Shali and others vs. National Insurance Company Limited and others (2012) 11 SCC 738 , it was mentioned that the personal and living expenses of the deceased will have to be deducted @50% for the reason that the deceased was a bachelor but the facts remains that as per the ratio laid down in the case of Sarla Verma (Smt.) and others vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and another; (2009) 6 SCC 121 , the Hon'ble Supreme Court observed that "this practice was evolved out of experience, logic and convenience. In fact, one-third deduction got statutory recognition under Second Schedule to the Act, in respect of claims under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988." The 50% deduction in the case of bachelor will have to be made only in expectational circumstances, where the aspects for the future prospects has been considered. 7. In the instant case, no aspect for future prospects has been considered. Hence, in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, the deduction will have to be made one-third of the income. 8. The Truck in question was insured with the New India Assurance Co. Limited - opposite party no. 2 and on the date of accident, Policy was alive. The Truck driver Sri Desh Raj was holding a valid driving license on the date of accident and the Truck was plying as per law. Hence, the Insurance Company - opposite party no. 2 is responsible for paying the compensation. 9. In view of above and by considering the ratio laid down in the case of Laxmi Devi (supra) the notional income will have to be taken @Rs.3000/- per month, which comes to Rs.36,000/- per annum. Out of it, one-third is deducted for living and personal expenses. 2 is responsible for paying the compensation. 9. In view of above and by considering the ratio laid down in the case of Laxmi Devi (supra) the notional income will have to be taken @Rs.3000/- per month, which comes to Rs.36,000/- per annum. Out of it, one-third is deducted for living and personal expenses. Thus, it comes to Rs.24,000/-. 10. By looking the average age of the parents, multiplier of 13 was rightly applied by the Tribunal. So, the compensation comes to 24,000x13 = Rs.3,12,000/ In addition, the claimants are also entitled for Rs.4,500/- for funeral expenses and loss of estate etc. So, the total compensation comes to Rs.3,12,000+4,500 = Rs.3,16,500/- and same will be paid along with interest @6% per annum from the date of filing of the Claim Petition before the Tribunal. Since the deceased was unmarried, so no other benefits can be given. 11. In view of above, we modify the impugned judgment and award dated 05.09.2009 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kheri, to the effect that the appellants-claimants are entitled for the compensation of Rs.3,16,500/- along with interest @6% per annum from the date of filing of the Claim Petition before the Tribunal. 12. Accordingly, the respondent-insurance company is directed to deposit the amount/remaining amount along with interest before the concerned Tribunal within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. The amount already deposited be adjusted. The registry of this Court is also directed to send the lower court record, if any, within a period of one month to the concerned Tribunal, who is further directed to disburse the amounts, in terms of the award within a period of three months thereafter. 13. In the result, the appeal filed by the claimant-appellant is allowed. ________________