JUDGMENT & ORDER : Heard Ms. S Deb Gupta, the learned counsel for the appellant. Also heard Mr. A. Sengupta, the learned counsel for the claimant-respondents. 2. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 26-9-2016 passed by the learned Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Court No.1, West Tripura in T.S(MAC) No.161/2013 awarding compensation of Rs.17,80,000/- to the claimant-respondents. 3. The principal grievance of the appellant-insurer as projected by the learned counsel is that the income of the deceased, who was an auto rickshaw driver, as assessed by the Tribunal at Rs.300/- per day thereby making it to Rs.9,000/- per month, is on the higher side inasmuch as the deceased could not have possibly driven the auto-rickshaw every day without rest and, as such, the total number of earning days of the deceased should be calculated on the basis of 26 working days and not 30 days. Refuting the contention of the learned counsel for the insurer, the learned counsel for the claimant-respondents submits that unlike other professions, it is a notorious fact that auto rickshaw drivers could not afford to enjoy holidays and ply on the road every day and the assessment of income of the deceased @ Rs.300/- for 30 days is, therefore, not wide of the mark, much less, perverse. The learned counsel for the claimant-respondents, also referred to the notification dated 09-01-2017 issued by this Court wherein it is mentioned that the wages are to be calculated @ Rs.9,000/- per month in case of Light Motor Vehicle driver(on production of license) for the accidents which took place after 31-12-2010. In light of the aforesaid guidelines, contends the learned counsel for the claimant-respondent, the Tribunal did not commit any wrong in assessing the income of the deceased at Rs.9,000/- per month as the accident took place on 26-7-2012. 4. I have gone through the judgment of the Tribunal and after giving my anxious consideration to the submissions advanced by learned counsel appearing for rival parties, I am of the view that the notification dated 09-01-2017 issued by this Court is applicable only for the purpose of compromise in a Lok Adalat proceedings, and not in an appeal where the parties contest the case on merit. In my opinion, there is force in the contention of the learned counsel for the appellant. In my opinion, there is force in the contention of the learned counsel for the appellant. Keeping in mind the ground reality that an auto rickshaw driver like the deceased could not have worked 30 days in a month, at least 4 days in a month should be set aside as non-working days and, as such, only 26 (twenty-six) days should be taken into consideration while determining his monthly income. In that view of the matter, the income of deceased should be assessed at Rs.7,800/- per month and not Rs.9,000/- as assessed by the Tribunal. This calls for a limited interference of this Court. Consequently, the compensation will be worked out as follows : Rs.7,800 × 12 (months) = Rs.93,600/-, which when multiplied by a multiplier of 15 comes to Rs.14,04,000/-, to which shall be added 50% as loss of prospective income, which then will come to Rs.21,06,000/-. Out of this amount, 1/3rd should be deducted for the living and personal expenses of the deceased i.e. Rs.21,06,000 - Rs.7,02,000 = Rs.14,04,000/-. A sum of Rs.1,00,000/- shall be added for the loss of consortium, which shall be payable only to the respondent No.1 (wife of the deceased). Another sum of Rs.35,000/- shall be awarded to the claimant-respondent No.2 for loss of care and guidance of her father. The respondents are also be entitled to a sum of Rs.25,000/- for funeral expenses. Thus, the total amount of compensation payable to the claimant-respondents will come to (Rs.14,04,000 + Rs.1,00,000 + Rs.35,000 + Rs.25,000) = Rs.15,64,000/-. The claimant-respondents shall also be entitled to interest at the rate of 9% per annum with effect from the date of the claim petition. 5. For the reasons stated in the foregoing, this appeal is allowed. The appellant-insurer is, therefore, directed to deposit with the Registry a sum of Rs.15,64,000/- together with interest @ 9% per annum with effect from the date of the claim petition within 2(two) months from the date of receipt of this judgment. Needless to say, any amount already deposited by them or paid to the claimant-respondents shall be adjusted accordingly. The impugned judgment, accordingly, stands modified to the extent indicated above. Transmit the lower court records forthwith.