JUDGMENT : This appeal is by the appellants-claimants being assailing from the Award passed by the Senior Civil Judge and M.A.C.T., Aland for enhancing the amount awarded in its judgment and award dated 10.3.2016 in M.V.C. No. 414/2015. 2. Appeal is admitted. With the consent of the learned counsels appearing for the parties, the appeal is heard finally and disposed of by this judgment. 3. Learned counsel for the appellants-claimants would submit that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal under various heads is on the lower side. He further contended that the income of the deceased taken by the Tribunal is very meager and thereby the compensation awarded towards loss of dependency is also on the lower side. He further contends that the multiplier adopted by taking the age of the dependents instead of the age of the deceased is not correct. In order to substantiate the said fact, the learned counsel relied upon a decision reported in the case of Munna Lal Jain and Another Vs. Vipin Kumar Sharma and Others (2015 (3) T.A.C. 1 (S.C.). Hence, he prays for allowing the appeal by enhancing the compensation awarded by the Tribunal. 4. Per contra, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the second respondent-insurance company supports the impugned award and therefore he seeks for dismissal of the appeal. 5. The occurrence of incident in question and the insurance of the offending vehicle with the second respondent is not in dispute. As could be seen from the impugned judgment and award, the Tribunal after taking into consideration the age of the deceased and dependency as there is no proper documents produced before the Tribunal. By taking the notional income at the rate of Rs.6000/- and after deducting 50% of the income for his personal extent, awarded a sum of Rs.4,68,000/- for loss of dependency and on conventional heads awarded an amount of Rs.20,000/- towards love and affection, Rs.10,000/- towards loss of estate, Rs.1,45,000/- towards medical expenses, Rs.20,000/- towards pain and suffering before the death of deceased, Rs.40,000/- towards obsequies functions as well as for the transportation of the body of the deceased has been awarded by the Tribunal. 6. In that light the Tribunal, in all awarded a total sum of Rs.7,03,000/- as compensation with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. 7. In the normal course, the method adopted by the Tribunal would be justified. 6. In that light the Tribunal, in all awarded a total sum of Rs.7,03,000/- as compensation with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. 7. In the normal course, the method adopted by the Tribunal would be justified. But, in the absence of documentary evidence with regard to the income of the deceased, the Tribunal ought to have taken the notional income at the rate of Rs.7500/- p.m., which would be the yardstick to be adopted in Lok Adalath settlements that too when the alleged accident has taken place during 2015. The multiplier applied by the Tribunal and the disability assessed is just and proper. If the income of the deceased is taken at the rate of Rs.7,500/- p.m. after deducting 50% of the income for his personal expenses since he was unmarried and after applying multiplier of 13 by taking into consideration the age of the dependents, the claimants will be entitled to an amount of Rs.5,85,000/-. The Tribunal since already has awarded Rs.4,68,000/- after deducting the same, the appellants-claimants are entitled to an amount of Rs.1,17,000/- as additional compensation for loss of dependency. The Tribunal has awarded an amount of Rs.20,000/- for loss of love and affection. Taking into consideration the dependency and the age of the claimants an additional amount of Rs.80,000/- has been awarded for loss of love and affection. The claimants are aged about 50 and 58 years, as such, they are also entitled for an additional amount of Rs.40,000/- towards loss of estate. So far as the medical expenses are concerned, the Tribunal after proper assessment has rightly awarded Rs.1,45,000/- and so far as the pain and suffering of the deceased is concerned as could be seen from the record the accident took place on 19.3.2015 and from that date the deceased was taking the treatment as an inpatient upto 24.3.2015 and subsequently he succumbed to the fatal injuries. Taking into consideration the nature of the injuries and the suffering, the amount awarded on pain and suffering appears to be on the lower side. As such, the claimants are entitled to another amount of Rs.30,000/- for pain and suffering. So far as the transportation and the efficacious functions are concerned the Tribunal has awarded Rs.40,000/- which appears to be just and proper. 8. As such, the claimants are entitled to another amount of Rs.30,000/- for pain and suffering. So far as the transportation and the efficacious functions are concerned the Tribunal has awarded Rs.40,000/- which appears to be just and proper. 8. Even though the learned counsel for the appellants’ relied upon the decisions stated supra, but normally it is the age of the dependent’s parents, which will be the proper method for the purpose of assessing the income, dependency, age of dependent’s on that basis the multiplier will be taken. In that light, the order of the Tribunal is justified. It does not requires any interference. 9. By taking into consideration the above said facts and circumstances of the case, I deem it proper that the modified additional amount which has been awarded now under various heads, will be the just and proper compensation and it would meet the ends of justice. 10. Thus, in all the appellants-claimants are entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.2,67,000/- (Two Lakhs Sixty Seven Thousand Rupees Only) with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. 11. Accordingly, appeal is allowed in part and the Judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is modified to the extent as indicated above. 12. The Insurance Company shall deposit the additional amount of compensation awarded by this Court within six weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this judgment. 13. The fixed deposits are to be made as per the award of the Tribunal. Draw up the award accordingly. No order as to costs.