JUDGMENT : Akhilesh Chandra, J. Interlocutory Application No. 3277 of 2013: In view of the assertions made in the interlocutory application the delay in filing of this appeal is condoned. Accordingly, interlocutory application stands disposed of. Miscellaneous Appeal No. 294 of 2013: 1. Heard. This is an appeal preferred against judgment dated 5.11.2012 in Claim Case No. 28 of 2010 by the Second Ad-hoc Additional District Judge-cum-M.A.C.T., Lakhisarai. 2. Since the appeal is on very limited issue, simply about quantum of award, there appears no need to go in other details except the relevant ones for the purpose. 3. Deceased Ashwani Kumar alias Sunil Kumar died on 30.1.2010 at the age of 32 years in an accident involving truck under valid insurance of the appellant leaving behind his widow, four minor daughters and parents. 4. As per claimants-respondents deceased had hotel business besides agriculture and had been earning Rs. 8,000 per month. 5. The Claims Tribunal on the basis of Exh. 1, the certificate issued by Circle Officer, certifying the income of Rs. 8,000 per month awarded a sum of Rs. 4,13,000 with interest at the rate of 9 per cent per annum. The aforesaid amount includes not only the income based on Exh. 1 but also other expenses. 6. Submission is that Exh. 1 is issued 2 years after death of the deceased is indicative of income of claimant No. 1, i.e., widow of the deceased, there is no document in the name of the deceased either showing his income or any land or details of agricultural income, etc., but the Claims Tribunal assuming the income of claimant No. 1 as of the deceased awarded exaggerated amount. 7. After some arguments, learned counsel representing the claimants-respondents was left with no option but to agree that in view of the decision of the Apex Court rendered in the case of Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transport Corporation, 2009 ACJ 1298 (SC), amount of award may be calculated only on the basis of a notional income of the deceased including future prospects and other expenses. 8. The law is very much clear on the point that in such a case notional income cannot be less than Rs. 3,000 per month and that comes to Rs. 36,000 per annum and since the deceased was aged about 32 years due multiplier 16 is applicable. 9. 8. The law is very much clear on the point that in such a case notional income cannot be less than Rs. 3,000 per month and that comes to Rs. 36,000 per annum and since the deceased was aged about 32 years due multiplier 16 is applicable. 9. Taking into consideration the number of dependants only 1/5th of the annual income can be deducted towards personal expenditure of the deceased, this brings the amount to Rs. 28,800 which on being multiplied with 16 comes to Rs. 4,60,800 wherein 50 per cent for future prospects is required to be added making the same to Rs. 6,91,200 wherein Rs. 25,000 may also be added as additional expenses bringing the amount to Rs. 7,16,200. On being rounded off it comes to Rs. 7,20,000. The said amount shall also carry interest at the rate of 6 per cent per annum from the date of filing of claim application till actual payment is made. 10. With the above modification in the award of the Claims Tribunal, the appeal stands disposed of. Simultaneously, the appellant is directed to satisfy the award within a month from today, failing which the interest rate shall go up to 9 per cent per annum as awarded by the Tribunal. Let statutory amount be remitted back to the Claims Tribunal for further needful.