JUDGMENT A.S. Pachhapure, J. 1. Though this matter is posted in the list of hearing on interlocutory application, with the consent of both the Counsel, taken up for final disposal. The appellants dissatisfied with the amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal for the death of Shivakumar in a motor vehicle accident have filed this appeal seeking enhancement. 2. The facts reveal that on 12-1-2007 Shivakumar (the deceased) was proceeding by walk near Mahagaon Cross and at that time TATA Sumo bearing Registration No. MH-24-C-3836 driven in a rash and negligent manner, hit him. Thereby he sustained severe injuries and died on the spot. His wife, children and parents made a claim for compensation for loss of dependency and on other conventional heads. 3. His wife was examined as P.W. 1 and in her evidence Exs. P. 1 to P. 14 were marked. The insurance policy was admitted in evidence with consent as Ex. R. 1. 4. The Tribunal having held the negligence on the part of the driver of the TATA Sumo, assessed the income of deceased at Rs. 3,000/- per month, awarded Rs. 25,000/- on conventional heads, and granted a sum of Rs. 3,85,000/- with interest at 6%. Dissatisfied with the amount of compensation his legal representatives have filed this appeal. 5. Heard the learned Counsel for both the parties. The following point arises for consideration: "Whether the appellants are entitled to enhanced compensation? If so, to what extent?" 6. Learned Counsel for the appellants would submit that the income assessed by the Tribunal is on the lower side and so also the compensation on conventional heads. Hence he submits that they need enhancement of the compensation. 7. On the other hand the learned Counsel for the insurer has supported the judgment and award of the Tribunal. 8. It is in the evidence of P.W. 1 that Shivakumar (the deceased) was running a kirana shop and the copy of the shop licence is produced at Ex. P. 14. He was also owning agricultural lands and to prove this fact the record of rights have been produced at Exs. P. 11 to P. 13. The Tribunal has assessed his income at Rs. 3,000/- per month. There are no basis for the same. Anyhow it is relevant that in respect of the accidents of the year 2007, generally a sum of Rs. P. 11 to P. 13. The Tribunal has assessed his income at Rs. 3,000/- per month. There are no basis for the same. Anyhow it is relevant that in respect of the accidents of the year 2007, generally a sum of Rs. 4,200/- is considered as income of a labourers in the Lok Adalats held. When the deceased was owning a shop and he was owning agricultural lands it is just and proper to accept his income at Rs. 4,500/-. There are as many as five legal representatives left behind by him and therefore, the deductions will have to be 1/4th of the income of the deceased. The net contribution per month would be Rs. 4,500 - Rs. 1,125 = Rs. 3,375/-. The net loss of dependency would be Rs. 3,375/- x 12 x 16 = Rs. 6,48,000/-. Deducting a sum of Rs. 3,60,000/- awarded by the Tribunal, the appellants are entitled to an additional sum of Rs. 2,88,000/- towards loss of dependency. Only a sum of Rs. 25,000/- is granted as compensation on conventional heads. Taking into consideration that the deceased has left his parents, minor children and wife, I think it would be just and proper to grant additional sum of Rs. 25,000/- on conventional heads. Thereby the additional compensation payable would be Rs. 2,88,000/- + Rs. 25,000/- = Rs. 3,13,000/- with interest at 6%. Hence the point is answered in the affirmative. Consequently, the appeal is allowed in part. The appellants are entitled to compensation of Rs. 3,13,000/- with interest at 6% from the date of petition till its payment in addition to the compensation awarded by the Tribunal. Out of the compensation enhanced, a sum of Rs. 53,000/- shall be shared equally among claimants 4 and 5 i.e., parents of the deceased. Remaining shall be distributed equally amongst wife and children and the share of the minors shall be deposited in any Nationalised Bank until they attain the age of majority with liberty to their mother to withdraw the accrued interest periodically for their welfare. The share of claimant 1 shall be paid to her. Appeal Partly Allowed