JUDGMENT : MR. G.S. AHLUWALIA, J. 1. This Misc. Appeal under Section 173 of Motor Vehicle Act has been filed against the award dated 29.4.2015 passed by the Third Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal Morena in Motor Accident Claim Case No.4 of 2013 for enhancement of compensation. 2. The necessary facts for the disposal of the present appeal in short are that on 18.11.2011 the deceased Munni Tomar was coming from her parents home on a motorcycle along with his son Tarun. The respondent No. 2 by driving the Maruty Van bearing Registration No. MP07/CA 8319 in a rash and negligent manner dashed the deceased as a result of which, she sustained grievous injuries and ultimately succumbed to the injuries on 23.11.2011 in J.A. Hospital Gwalior during treatment. It was pleaded by appellants that the deceased was a hale and healthy woman and apart from her house hold work, she used to do stitching of undergarments and was earning Rs. 4500/- per month. Accordingly, claim petition for grant of compensation to the tune of Rs. 12,38,000/- was filed. The respondent No. 1 filed his written statement and denied the allegations and further submitted that the vehicle was insured with the respondent No. 3. The respondent No. 3 submitted its written statement and denied the accident and further pleaded that the driver of the vehicle was not having valid driving license and the vehicle was being driven in violation of the terms of insurance and therefore, the insurance company is not liable to pay compensation. 3. The Claims Tribunal after recording evidence of the parties and hearing them held that the accident was caused by the respondent No. 2 in a rash and negligent manner and the insurance company is liable to pay compensation. As the factum of the accident and the liability of the parties has not been challenged by filing appeal, therefore, no further consideration is required. 4. The next question would be that what should the quantum of compensation? It is submitted by the counsel for the appellants that Motor Accident Claims Tribunal has wrongly assessed the income of the deceased on a lower side and therefore, compensation is liable to be enhanced. 4. The next question would be that what should the quantum of compensation? It is submitted by the counsel for the appellants that Motor Accident Claims Tribunal has wrongly assessed the income of the deceased on a lower side and therefore, compensation is liable to be enhanced. Per contra, counsel for the respondent No. 3 supported the findings recorded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal with regard to the income and compensation awarded to the claimants and relied upon the following judgments: (1) Sarla Verma and Others v. Delhi Transport Corporation and Another (2009) ACJ 1298; (2) Ramkishan and Another v. Dharam Vir and Others reported in (2008) 1 TAC 459 (3) Mubarik and Another v. Naushad and Others (2006) ACJ 1189; (4) Amar Singh v. Manoj (2007) 3 TAC 733; (5) Surjeet Singh and Others v. Chandan Dogra and Others (2015) ACJ 1974; (6) Nandi Brata Tripura v. Branch Manager, United Indian Insurance Co. Ltd. And Others(2007) ACJ 382; (7) Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. v. Smt. Vaikunthi Bai and Others (2007) 2 TAC 59; (8) Amar Singh v. Rambir (2013) ACJ 1732; (9) ICICI v. Santosh 2014 ACJ 2056; 5. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal assessed the age of the deceased as 50 years. Further, the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal came to a conclusion that the appellants have failed to prove that deceased was earning Rs. 4500/- by doing stitching, embroidery work etc. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal after relying on the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Lata Wadhwa and Others v. State of Bihar and Others reported in AIR 2001 SC 3218 came to a conclusion that the services rendered by a housewife can be assessed at Rs. 3,000/- per month. 6. This court cannot loose sight of the fact that deceased Munni Tomar was a house wife and she was looking after her husband and children as well as house. She was rendering services which may not be assessed in terms of the money. However, for the purposes of grant of compensation, the valuable services rendered by the house wife are to be assessed in terms of money. She was rendering services which may not be assessed in terms of the money. However, for the purposes of grant of compensation, the valuable services rendered by the house wife are to be assessed in terms of money. Although, the provisions of Section 163A of the Motor Vehicle Act would not apply to a claim petition which is filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicle Act but certainly, II schedule can be a guiding factor to assess the income of a non earning person. 7. The Supreme Court in the case of Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Dhanbai Kanji Gadhvi and Others (2011) SCC Volume 11, 513 has held that remedy for payment of compensation both under Section 163A and Section 166 being final and independent of each other has been statutorily provided and that a claimant cannot pursue his remedies there under simultaneously. The claimants must opt/elect either of proceeding under section 163A or under Section 166 of the Act but not under the both. Thus, it is clear that the provisions of Section 163A of the Motor Vehicle Act would not apply but in case of non earning person, the guidance can be taken from the provisions of Section 163A of the Act. Schedule II Clause 6 of the Motor Vehicle Act provides for notional income for compensation to those who had no income prior to the accident and it is provided that in case of non earning person, notional income would be Rs. 15,000/- per annum. This court cannot loose sight of the fact that II Schedule was inserted vide Act of 1994 with effect from 14.11.1994 and as on today 23 long years have passed. The accident in the present case took place on 18.11.2011. On the date of accident, 17 years had passed from the day when the IInd Schedule was inserted. Prices of the daily need articles have undisputedly gone up by many times and since Clause 6 (A) of II Schedule is merely guiding factor, therefore, the rise in price of the daily need goods are certainly required to be taken into consideration while assessing income of a non earning person. 8. The Supreme Court in the case of Lata Wadhwa and Ors. v. State Of Bihar and Ors. AIR 2001 SC 3218 had assessed the income of a house wife at Rs. 30,000/- per year. 8. The Supreme Court in the case of Lata Wadhwa and Ors. v. State Of Bihar and Ors. AIR 2001 SC 3218 had assessed the income of a house wife at Rs. 30,000/- per year. The accident in the case of Lata Wadhwa (Supra) had taken place in the year 1981, thereafter in the year 1994; Clause 6 of IInd Schedule was inserted. As clause 6 of IInd Schedule cannot be treated as sole guiding factor for assessing the age of non earning person, therefore, taking guidance from Clause 6 of II Schedule, this court must assess the services rendered by a house wife in the monetary form for assessment of the compensation. For assessing value of the services rendered by the house wife, surrounding circumstances, status of the parteis, the area where the claimants are residing etc. are some of the factors which are required to be taken into consideration. If the claimants are the residents of small village, then, the value of the services rendered by the house wife will be required to be assessed on a lower side in comparison to the case where the claimants and deceased are residing in a Metropolitan city. In a case where the deceased is residing in a Metropolitan city then, house hold work, teaching the children, leaving the children and bringing back from their school, for doing the outside works are having direct nexus with the house hold services which will be something different from that in comparison to the claimants residing in a rural area. Although the services rendered by a house wife whether she is residing in a rural area or in a urban area are beyond the assessment because, her love, affection, care etc. cannot be assessed in terms of money. However, as it is already been mentioned above that for assessing the amount of compensation, although which would be by way of token amount of solace to those persons who have lost the house wife or the mother, the services rendered by the lady/house wife/house maker are required to be assessed in the form of money. 9. In the present case, the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal has assessed the income of the deceased Munni Tomar at Rs. 3000/- per month. In the considered opinion of this Court, assessment of income of the deceased Munni Tomar by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal is correct. 10. 9. In the present case, the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal has assessed the income of the deceased Munni Tomar at Rs. 3000/- per month. In the considered opinion of this Court, assessment of income of the deceased Munni Tomar by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal is correct. 10. The next question for determination is whether any amount out of the annual income of the house wife should be deducted towards her personal expenses or not. The Supreme Court in the case of Lata Wadhwa (Supra) had not deducted a single paise out of the income of the house wife towards her personal expenses. Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of Surjit Singh and Others v. Chandan Dogra and Others 2015 ACJ 1974 has held as under : "8. Learned counsel for the appellants argued that in view of Lata Wadhwa and others v. State of Bihar and others 2001 ACJ 1735, the contribution of the deceased towards her family should have been taken at least Rs. 36,000/- per annum as per her age. He contended that it was held in the said case that where a house-wife dies in an accident and she is aged 34-59 being active in life, the annual contribution should be taken to be Rs. 36,000/-. Nothing was also required to be deducted towards personal expenses on account of the contribution. Learned counsel for the appellants also referred to a judgment of this Court in FAO No. 3310 of 2012 titled Paramjit Singh and another v. Dilbagh Singh alias Bagga and others decided on 16.5.2013 by a Division Bench, where the Bench held to the same effect. Accepting the principle laid down in Lata Wadhwa (supra), the value in money for contribution of the house-wife was taken to be Rs. 3,000/- for the above said age group and it was also held that nothing was required to be deducted towards personal expenses. 12. The arguments raised by learned counsel for the appellants are reasonable and convincing and are accepted. It is held that the contribution of the deceased for the family was Rs. 3,000/- per month i.e. Rs. 36,000/- annually. Nothing is to be deducted towards personal expenses. Applying the multiplier of 8, the amount comes to Rs. 2,88,000/-. The other amount of Rs. 10,000/- awarded by the Tribunal does not call for any change. The total compensation is enhanced to Rs. 3,000/- per month i.e. Rs. 36,000/- annually. Nothing is to be deducted towards personal expenses. Applying the multiplier of 8, the amount comes to Rs. 2,88,000/-. The other amount of Rs. 10,000/- awarded by the Tribunal does not call for any change. The total compensation is enhanced to Rs. 2,98,000/- and the appeal is allowed accordingly. Rate of interest on the enhanced amount shall remain same as awarded by the Tribunal". 11. In the present case, the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal has deducted ?rd of the annual income of the deceased Munni Tomar towards her personal expenses. As it has already been held that the services rendered by the house wife cannot be assessed in the terms of money. Therefore, the services by a house wife are not rendered for her personal purposes but by rendering services as a house wife, she looks after her husband, her children and her elderly members of the house etc. Hence, it can be said that a house wife renders a service to others and she do not do anything for her own. The maintenance of his wife is the primary obligation of the husband and therefore, it cannot be said that if the house wife is residing in the house or is having meals or is getting clothes etc., then, certain amount under the head of personal expenses should be deducted from the income of the deceased so assessed on the basis of the services rendered by her for her. Thus, this court is of the considered opinion that when the income of deceased house wife is assessed on the basis of the services rendered by her in the capacity of a house wife, then, no deduction may be made under the head of personal expenses. 12. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal had assessed yearly income of the deceased at Rs. 36,000/- (Rs.3000/- per month). After deducting ?rd towards personal expenses, yearly income of the deceased was assessed at Rs. 24,000/- and after applying the multiplier of 13, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal assessed compensation towards loss of income at 3,12,000/-. This court has already held that ?rd of the income of the deceased is not to be deducted towards her personal expenses. 13. Accordingly, income of the deceased is assessed at Rs. 4,68,000/- (36000X13). The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal has awarded an amount of Rs. 1 lac towards loss of consortium and Rs. This court has already held that ?rd of the income of the deceased is not to be deducted towards her personal expenses. 13. Accordingly, income of the deceased is assessed at Rs. 4,68,000/- (36000X13). The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal has awarded an amount of Rs. 1 lac towards loss of consortium and Rs. 25,000/- towards funeral expenses and Rs. 18,907/- towards medical expenses. No interference is required so far as these heads are concerned. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal had granted an amount of Rs. 10,000/- each to the respondents No. 2 and 3 towards the loss of love and affection which according to this Court the same is on the lower side. Therefore, considering the age of the respondents No. 2 and 3, additional amount of Rs. 15,000/- each is awarded to the respondents No. 2 and 3 towards the loss of love and affection. 14. Accordingly, the appellants would be entitled to a total compensation of Rs. 6,61,907/- (4,68,000+1,00,000+25,000+18,907+50,000). The Tribunal has awarded an amount of Rs. 4,75,910/-. Thus, the appellants are entitled for additional amount of Rs. 1,85,997/- which would carry interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of the application till it's actually paid. Out of this enhanced amount, Rs. 1 lac shall be deposited in the FDR in the name of appellant No. 1 for a period of 5 years whereas, Rs. 43,000/- each shall be deposited in the FDR in the name of appellants No. 2 and 3 for a period of 5 years. With the aforesaid modification, this appeal stands allowed and disposed of.