JUDGMENT : C.K. ABDUL REHIM, J. 1. The above appeal is disposed of at the stage of the admission itself since the Standing Counsel who entered appearance on behalf of the 3rd respondent/Insurance Company had conceded for the same. 2. Claimants in O.P. (MV) No. 1182/2007 on the files of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Mavelikara are the appellants herein, seeking enhancement of the amount of compensation awarded. Husband of the first appellant, who was the father of appellants 2 and 3 and the son of the 4th respondent, died in a motor vehicle accident which occurred on 1.3.2007 at about 11.30 p.m. The accident occurred when a vehicle bearing Registration No. TN/48C-9003 hit against the vehicle bearing Registration No. KL/4V-9003 on which the deceased was travelling. The Tribunal found that the driver of the offending vehicle was negligent in causing the accident. Accordingly, the liability is fixed on the 3rd respondent. The question of negligence or the question of liability of the 3rd respondent are not in dispute. 3. Learned counsel for the appellants contended that the Tribunal went highly erred in not accepting the monthly income of the deceased as claimed by the appellants. On an appreciation of the factual circumstances, we notice that even though the appellants claimed that the deceased was working as a Production Executive in the cine field, nothing was produced to prove his occupation or income. The Tribunal fixed a notional income of Rs. 3000/- per month for the purpose of computation of the loss of dependency. Learned counsel had cited various legal precedents of the Honourable Supreme Court which would indicate that the amount fixed as notional income is on the lower side. Evidently, the Tribunal had adopted the correct multiplier of 11. We are of the opinion that, taking into consideration of the fact that the accident occurred in the year 2007, an amount of Rs. 4500/- can reasonably be fixed as the notional monthly income of the deceased. The Tribunal had added 15% considering future prospects in his earnings. Therefore, the amount awarded under the head of loss of dependency need to be reworked. Monthly income of the deceased after deducting 1/4th towards his personal expenses will come to Rs. 3881.25 (4500 + 15% x 3/4). The monthly income for computing the multiplicand is rounded to Rs. 4000/-. Calculated on that basis, the dependency would work out to Rs. Therefore, the amount awarded under the head of loss of dependency need to be reworked. Monthly income of the deceased after deducting 1/4th towards his personal expenses will come to Rs. 3881.25 (4500 + 15% x 3/4). The monthly income for computing the multiplicand is rounded to Rs. 4000/-. Calculated on that basis, the dependency would work out to Rs. 5,28,000/- (4000 x 12 x 11). This will entitle the appellants for an enhancement of Rs. 1,86,450/-. The Tribunal has not granted any thing towards transportation charges. We are inclined to grant a sum of Rs. 2500/- under this head. The amount of Rs. 1,25,000/- awarded towards compensation for loss of love and affection is slightly on the lower side. We are inclined to increase the same to Rs. 1,50,000/- which will entitle the appellants for a further sum of Rs. 25,000/-. 4. Thus the appellants are entitled for a total enhancement of Rs. 2,13,950/-. Therefore the above appeal is hereby allowed by increasing the total amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal by a further sum of Rs. 2,13,950/- (Rupees two lakh thirteen thousand and nine hundred and fifty only). The said amount will carry interest at 9% per annum from the date of the claim petition till realisation. The 3rd respondent/Insurance Company is directed to deposit the amount within a period of two months from today. If such deposits is made, the appellants are at liberty to approach the Tribunal seeking withdrawal of the amount. If any such application is filed, the Tribunal shall pass appropriate orders considering the question of permitting withdrawal.