JUDGMENT & ORDER : Heard Mr. A. Gon Choudhury, the learned counsel for the appellant. I have also heard Ms. S. Deb Gupta, the learned counsel for the claimant-respondent No. 1. No representation from the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 despite proper service of notice upon them. 2. This appeal under Section 173, Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (“the Act”), preferred by the New India Assurance Company Ltd. (“insurer”), is directed against the judgment dated 10.01.2013 passed by the learned Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Court No.2, West Tripura, Agartala in T.S. (MAC) No. 118 of 2011 awarding a compensation of Rs.5,04,200/- together with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition in favour of the respondent No. 1. 3. The main contention of the learned counsel for the appellant-insurer is that the assessment of the income of the deceased at Rs.4,000/- per month when no documentary evidence could even be produced by the claimant-respondent is perverse as well as arbitrary. According to the learned counsel for the appellant-insurer, the Tribunal ought to have assessed her annual income on notional basis, which could have ensured the award of fair and just compensation to the claimant-respondent. 4. On the other hand, Ms. S. Deb Gupta, the learned counsel for the claimant-respondent submits that the Tribunal did not even add 40% to the income of the deceased as future prospects, which is contrary to the law laid down by the Apex Court in Sarla Verma (Smt.) and Others Vrs. Delhi Transport Corporation and Another: (2009) 6 SCC 121 , which may be rectified even now. She also submits that the Tribunal in not awarding any amount for loss of love and affection to the claimant-respondent has acted contrary to the decisions of the Apex Court. She also complains that the funeral expenses awarded by the Tribunal at Rs.5,000/- is on the lower side which shall have to be enhanced to Rs.25,000/-. 5. The fact that the deceased was working as a commission agent for postal savings is not in dispute. The only issue raised by the insurer is that no documentary evidence could be procured by the claimant-respondent to substantiate her claim that the deceased was earning Rs.7,500/- or Rs.4,000/- per month, as assessed by the Tribunal. 5. The fact that the deceased was working as a commission agent for postal savings is not in dispute. The only issue raised by the insurer is that no documentary evidence could be procured by the claimant-respondent to substantiate her claim that the deceased was earning Rs.7,500/- or Rs.4,000/- per month, as assessed by the Tribunal. In my opinion, once it is found that the deceased at the time of accident was working as commission agent for postal savings, the determination made by the Tribunal of the income of the deceased at Rs.4,000/- per month is not wide of the mark. On the contrary, the certificate dated 22.09.2009 issued by the District Magistrate & Collector, West Tripura District, Agartala appointing the deceased as an agent under Mahila Pradan Kshetriya Bachat Yojana fortifies the conclusion of the Tribunal that the deceased must have earned Rs.4,000/- per month. After all, some element of guess work is always permissible, unless exorbitant, in determining the income of the victim of an accident, more so, in a country where majority of the population is not paying income tax and it is difficulty to procure a reliable income certificate. In this view of the matter, the income of the deceased as assessed by the Tribunal at Rs.4,000/- per month does not call for interference of this Court. The deceased was undoubtedly an unmarried person at the time of the accident and is survived by her mother. The insurer should not have filed an appeal in a case of this nature and should have accepted the award and deposit the award of compensation together with the interest accrued thereon without any delay so as to save money on interest. This Court cannot be oblivious of the recent decisions of the Apex Court awarding Rs.1,00,000/- by way of loss of love and affection and another sum of Rs.25,000/- as funeral expenses. The impugned judgment, therefore, calls for the interference of this Court in this behalf even though no appeal is filed by the claimant-respondent. 6. Resultantly, this appeal has no merit and is, accordingly, dismissed. The impugned judgment, therefore, calls for the interference of this Court in this behalf even though no appeal is filed by the claimant-respondent. 6. Resultantly, this appeal has no merit and is, accordingly, dismissed. The appellant-insurer is directed to deposit the awarded sum of Rs.5,04,200/- plus Rs.1,00,000/- for loss of love and affection and another sum Rs.25,000/- as funeral expenses thereby enhancing the entire compensation payable to Rs.6,29,200/-, which will carry interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition for payment to the claimant respondent. The entire compensation as enhanced now together with interest @ 9% per annum shall be deposited by the insurer with this Registry within 2(two) months from the date of receipt of this judgment. 7. It is made clear that as and when the amount is deposited, the same shall be released to the claimant-respondent as per the usual arrangements, without further reference from this Court. Any amount already paid to or deposited by the appellant-insurer to the claimant-respondent shall be adjusted accordingly. The impugned award stands modified in the manner and to the extent indicated above. Transmit the L.C. records to the Tribunal forthwith.