JUDGMENT 1. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed against the decree and judgment dated 28.11.2007 made in MCOP No.4 of 2004 on the file of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (II Small Causes Court), Chennai. 2. The appellants filed a claim petition before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (II Small Causes Court), Chennai, claiming compensation for the death of one Ravichandran, the husband of the first appellant, father of the appellants 2 and 3 and son of the 4th appellant. 3. According to the appellants, on 4.11.2003, at about 1.30 p.m., the said Ravichandran was riding his motorcycle, bearing Registration No.TN-22-T8509 on Tambaram-Velacherry Main Road from east to west. At that time, a bus belonging to respondent MTC, bearing Registration No. TN-01-N-2167, came in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the motorcycle and thereby the said Ravichandran was knocked down and died due to the injuries. The said Ravichandran was working as Manager in the Airport Authority of India and was earning a sum of Rs.40,000/- per month. He was aged 43 at the time of accident and a sum of Rs.90,00,000/- was claimed at the time of accident. 4. The respondent Transport Corporation denied the claim. According to the respondent, the deceased was driving the motorcycle in a careless manner and after losing his balance, he had fallen down under the rear wheel of the bus and therefore, the driver was not negligent. The income was also denied. 5. However, the Tribunal found that the driver of the bus was negligent in causing the accident and fastened the liability on the respondent Corporation. 6. The claimant has produced the salary certificate and also the income tax particulars to prove the income of the deceased. A witness was also examined as P.W.3 to speak about the salary. 7. According to P.W.3, the monthly gross salary of the deceased was Rs.38,710/-.However, the Tribunal fixed the net income of the deceased as Rs.19,552/- and deducted 1/3 and arrived at Rs.13,015/- as contribution to the family and applied multiplier 15. The calculated loss of income was arrived at Rs.23,42,700/- and along with conventional damages a total of 23,77,700/- which is calculated hereunder: Compensation for loss of dependency .... Rs.23,42,700 Funeral expenses .... Rs. 5,000 Loss of Consortium .... Rs. 10,000 Loss of love and affection ... Rs. 20,000 ___________ Rs.23,77,700 __________ 8. Not satisfied with the compensation, the claimants are before this Court. 9. Rs.23,42,700 Funeral expenses .... Rs. 5,000 Loss of Consortium .... Rs. 10,000 Loss of love and affection ... Rs. 20,000 ___________ Rs.23,77,700 __________ 8. Not satisfied with the compensation, the claimants are before this Court. 9. Mr.V. Mohan Choudary, learned counsel for the appellants pointed out that the Tribunal is wrong in fixing the income of the deceased as Rs.19,552/-. He also pointed out that the gross salary was not taken into consideration and the future prospectus was also not considered. Further he pointed out that a meagre amount was awarded for loss of consortium and for loss of love and affection. 10. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondent pointed out that after the death of the deceased, the first appellant was given job on compassionate ground and there is no financial loss to the family. The learned counsel pointed out that the income now received by the first appellant has to be taken into account. 11. Heard and perused the materials available on record. 12. The present appeal is for enhancement for compensation. It is admitted that the deceased was working as Manager in Airport Authority of India and was drawing a gross salary of Rs.38,710/- and after deduction, the net salary was Rs.19,522/-. The Tribunal had taken into account only the net salary. However, the total income has to be taken into consideration and as per Sarla Verma's case (Smt.Sarla Verma and Others vs Delhi Transport Corporation and another, income tax has to be deducted. Since, the deceased was in permanent employment and aged 43 years, future prospectus has to be considered. 13. Though there is a plea that the first appellant is given a job on compassionate ground and is earning, the nature of the job and income is not elicited by the respondent. Therefore, applying the principles laid down in Sarla verma's case, cited supra, the compensation has to be calculated. 14. Since the monthly income is Rs.38,710/-, 50% (i.e. Rs.19,355) has to be included for future prospects. Thus, 38710 + 19355 = Rs.58,065/-. From the above, 30% has to be deducted towards tax. After deducting 30% towards tax (17,578/-), the amount is Rs.40,487/-. Among this 1/3 towards personal expenses Rs.13495/-. Rs.40487 – 13,495 = Rs.26,992/- is the contribution to the family. Now applying multiplier 15, the amount comes to 26992 x 12 x 15 = 48,58,560. Thus, 38710 + 19355 = Rs.58,065/-. From the above, 30% has to be deducted towards tax. After deducting 30% towards tax (17,578/-), the amount is Rs.40,487/-. Among this 1/3 towards personal expenses Rs.13495/-. Rs.40487 – 13,495 = Rs.26,992/- is the contribution to the family. Now applying multiplier 15, the amount comes to 26992 x 12 x 15 = 48,58,560. Hence loss of income to the family is Rs.48,58,560. 15. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the compensation is re-assessed as follows: Loss of income Rs. 48,58,560 Loss of consortium to the 1st appellant Rs. 25,000 loss of love affection to the children (each 15000) Rs. 30,000 4th appellant/mother Rs. 10,000 Transportation charges Rs. 10,000 Funeral expenses Rs. 10,000 49,43,560 Rounded off to Rs.50,00,000/-. Therefore, the award of Rs. 23,77,700/- is enhanced to Rs.50,00,000/-. Though the appeal is restricted to Rs.14,50,000/-, this court is empowered to grant the just and reasonable award. The enhanced award amount carries 7.5% interest. 16. Out of Rs.50,00,000/-, the 1st appellant/wife is entitled to receive a sum of Rs.20,00,000/- minor children i.e., the appellants 2 and 3 are entitled to get Rs.10,00,000/- each and the 4th appellant is entitled to get a sum of Rs.10,00,000/-. 17. The minors share shall be deposited as a Fixed Deposit in a Nationalised Bank, initially for a period of three years, and renewed thereafter periodically, till they attain majority. 18. In the result, the civil miscellaneous appeal is allowed. The amount is enhanced from Rs.23,77,700/- to Rs.50,00,000/- and the apportionment is as aforesaid. The enhanced amount carries 7.5% interest. The appellant is directed to pay the excess court fee for the enhanced amount awarded by this Court. No costs.