JUDGMENT : Servesh Kumar Gupta, J. Having heard learned Counsel for the parties, it transpires that the accident occurred at 12 AM in the intervening night of 16/17.6.2009 when the truck no. MP-06E-0447 dashed the motorcycle borne youth on Rudrapur-Lalkuan Road. This unmarried youth lost his life at the age of around 26 years. His mother (a widow) is the sole claimant. Learned Tribunal has awarded rupees ninety thousand as dependency amount against the claim of rupees fifteen lakhs. 2. It has vehemently been argued that the deceased youth was earning a handsome amount per month, but having sifted the impugned judgment, I feel that since no paper could be produced in order to advert the income of the deceased, hence the learned Tribunal has rightly taken up the notional income, as has been determined by a Division Bench of this Court in the case Smt. Sureshi Devi & Others Vs. National Insurance Company & Others, 2006 (2) U.D. 543 . 3. Future prospects also cannot be considered for the reason that nothing admissible could be brought on the record as regards the employment of the deceased even in the private sector. 4. Learned Counsel of the appellant has further agitated that low multiplier has been applied. He has stressed upon the law laid down in Sarla Verma case, which envisages a table highlighting several multipliers to be applied in different cases, but such case has well been clarified by the Hon’ble Apex Court again in Shakti Devi Vs. New India Insurance Co. Ltd. & Anr., reported in 2010 (2) UD 527, wherein it has been categorically held that in a case where the age of the claimant is higher than the deceased, then the age of the claimant, and not the age of the deceased, has to be taken into account for the purpose of calculating the loss of dependency. 5. Claimant/appellant Smt. Tara Devi, in the affidavit produced by her in form of chief examination, has disclosed her age to be 56 years. She has not been tested on such question in the cross-examination. So, if the claimant is between the age group of 56 to 60 years, then as per Sarla Verma case, the multiplier would be “9”, instead of “5” which has been applied by the learned Tribunal. 6. This way, if the multiplier of “9” is applied, then the amount of compensation comes to Rs. So, if the claimant is between the age group of 56 to 60 years, then as per Sarla Verma case, the multiplier would be “9”, instead of “5” which has been applied by the learned Tribunal. 6. This way, if the multiplier of “9” is applied, then the amount of compensation comes to Rs. 1,62,000/- (i.e. 18000 X 9). The impugned award is enhanced/modified to this extent along with 6 per cent per annum simple interest. Amount awarded by the Tribunal on other score is not disturbed. 7. Appeal stands partly allowed. Impugned award is modified to the extent indicated above. Respondent no. 1 shall deposit the enhanced amount along with 6 per cent per annum simple interest w.e.f. the date of filing the claim petition till the date of payment before the Tribunal concerned within six weeks from today. 8. Let the lower court record be sent back.