Mansoor Ahmad Mir, J. This appeal is directed against the judgment and award dated 30.10.2001, passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Chamba, H.P. hereinafter referred to as “the Tribunal”, for short, in MAC Petition No.20 of 2000, titled Smt. Anita Devi and others versus Rakesh Chona and another, whereby compensation to the tune of Rs.2,73,500/- alongwith interest @ 9% per annum with costs assessed at Rs.1,000/- came to be awarded in favour of the claimants and insurer was saddled with the liability, for short “the impugned award”, on the grounds taken in the memo of appeal. 2. Insurer, owner and driver have not questioned the impugned award on any ground, thus it has attained the finality, so far as it relates to them. 3. The claimants have questioned the impugned award on the ground of adequacy of compensation. 4. Thus, the only question to be determined in this appeal is-whether the amount awarded is adequate? The answer is in negative for the following reasons. 5. The claimants have sought compensation to the tune of Rs.5,00,000/-,as per the break-ups given in the claim petition before the Tribunal, on account of death of Bhagwan Singh Bijalwan, who died in a motor vehicle accident involving Bus No. HP-48-3672 on 21.1.2000 at 4.45 PM at Gawal Mandi near Kalhel Tehsil Churah District Chamba, HP. The deceased was a contractor and also an orchardist. He has placed on record the income and other certificates issued by the PWD, which do disclose that the deceased was a contractor but there is no positive proof on the file to hold that what was the monthly income and annual income of the deceased. Having said so, by a guess work, it can be safely said that the deceased was earning not less Rs.6000/- per month. The claimants are six in number and 1/4th was to be deducted in view of the 2nd Schedule attached to the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, for short “the Act”, read with Sarla Verma and others versus Delhi Transport Corporation and another reported in AIR 2009 SC 3104 and upheld in Reshma Kumari and others versus Madan Mohan and another, reported in 2013 AIR SCW 3120. The tribunal has deducted 1/3rd. The tribunal has deducted 1/3rd. The deceased was 51 years of age at the time of accident and as per Sarla Verma’s case supra, the multiplier applicable was “10” and the Tribunal has fallen in an error in applying the multiplier of “11”. Thus, it is held that the multiplier of “10” is just and appropriate multiplier applicable. 6. The Tribunal has fallen in an error in assessing the income of the deceased. Accordingly, it is held that the income of the deceased was not less than Rs.6000/- per month. Claimants are six in number and as per Sarla Verma’s case supra, 1/4th was to be deducted, as discussed supra. After deducting 1/4th, it is held that the claimants have lost source of dependency to the tune of Rs.4500/- per month. Thus, the claimants are held entitled to compensation to the tune of Rs.4500x12x10= Rs.5,40,000/- under the head “loss of source of dependency.” 7. In addition, the claimants are also held entitled to compensation under the following four heads: (i) Loss of love and affection: Rs.10,000/- (ii) Loss of estate : Rs.10,000/- (iii) Funeral expenses : Rs.10,000/- (iv) Loss of consortium : Rs.10,000/- Total Rs.40,000/- 8. Accordingly, the claimants are held entitled to compensation to the tune of Rs.5,40,000+ Rs.40,000= Rs.5,80,000/-. 9. The Tribunal has awarded interest @ 9% per annum. However, interest was to be awarded at the rate of 7.5% per annum, for the following reasons. 10. It is a beaten law of the land that the rate of interest should be awarded as per the prevailing rates, in view of the judgments rendered by the Apex Court in cases titled as United India Insurance Co. Ltd. and others versus Patricia Jean Mahajan and others, reported in (2002) 6 SCC 281 ; Satosh Devi versus National Insurance Company Ltd. and others, reported in 2012 AIR SCW 2892; Amrit Bhanu Shali and others versus National Insurance Company Limited and others reported in (2012) 11 SCC 738 ; Smt. Savita versus Binder Singh & others, reported in 2014, AIR SCW 2053; Kalpanaraj & others versus Tamil Nadu State Transport Corpn., reported in 2014 AIR SCW 2982; Amresh Kumari versus Niranjan Lal Jagdish Pd. Jain and others, reported in (2015) 4 SCC 433 , and Mohinder Kaur and others versus Hira Nand Sindhi (Ghoriwala) and another, reported in (2015) 4 SCC 434 , and discussed by this Court in a batch of FAOs, FAO No. 256 of 2010, titled as Oriental Insurance Company versus Smt. Indiro and others, being the lead case, decided on 19.06.2015. 11. Accordingly, interest @7.5% per annum is awarded from the date of claim petition till realization of the amount. 12. The insurer is directed to deposit the balance amount alongwith interest @ 7.5% per annum, within eight weeks from today in the Registry. The Registry, on deposit, is directed to release the amount in favour of the claimants, strictly in terms of the conditions contained in the impugned award, through payees’ cheque account, or by depositing the same in their bank accounts, after proper verification. 13. The amount already deposited by the insurer in the Registry or before the Tribunal, be released in favour of the claimants, forthwith, strictly in terms of the conditions contained in the impugned award, through payees’ cheque account, or by depositing the same in their bank accounts, after proper verification. 14. Viewed thus, the appeal is disposed of alongwith pending applications, compensation is enhanced and the impugned award is modified as indicated hereinabove. 15. Send down the record forthwith, after placing a copy of this judgment.