JUDGMENT : P. Sam Koshy, J. - The present appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act has been filed by the claimants seeking enhancement of compensation against the award dated 11.5.2012 passed by the 5th Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bilaspur (in short, the Tribunal) in Claim Case No. 49/2012. Vide the said impugned award, the Tribunal in a death case has awarded compensation of Rs. 2,01,000 to the claimants along with interest @ 7.5 percent per annum from the date of application. 2. Counsel for the appellant-claimant submits that the amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is unreasonably low considering the date of accident. Future prospects have also not been awarded. Further, income of the deceased has not been properly assessed. So also proper multiplier was not applied. Therefore, the award deserves to be modified and the compensation be suitably enhanced. 3. On the other hand Counsel for the Insurance Company opposes the appeal and submits that considering the age of the deceased, the nature of employment and the period of accident, the award seems to be just, fair and reasonable and does not warrant any interference. 4. Having heard the Counsel on either side and on perusal of records, the undisputed facts in the appeal being the date of accident 17.5.2011, the deceased being Irfan Ali, aged about 20 years and the offending vehicle being owned by the respondent No. 2 and driven by respondent No. 1. It is also not in dispute that the offending vehicle was duly insured with the respondent No. 3. 5. In the light of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, the only issue left for consideration is whether the compensation awarded is just or not? 6. Indisputably the date of accident being May 2011, the minimum income of an unskilled labour would had been Rs. 200 a day i.e. 6,000 per month. The deceased in the instant case is said to have been working as Electrician as also repairing works of Cooler which is supposed be skilled nature work. This Court therefore, assesses the income of the deceased at Rs. 6,000 instead of Rs. 2,600 as assessed by the Tribunal and proceeds to quantify the compensation. Further, the claimants would also be entitled for 40 percent of said amount towards future prospects. 7. Accepting Rs. This Court therefore, assesses the income of the deceased at Rs. 6,000 instead of Rs. 2,600 as assessed by the Tribunal and proceeds to quantify the compensation. Further, the claimants would also be entitled for 40 percent of said amount towards future prospects. 7. Accepting Rs. 6,000 as monthly income, if 40 percent of it is added, the monthly income comes to Rs. 8,400 i.e. 1,08,000 yearly, of which if 50 percent is deducted towards personal expenses as the deceased was a bachelor, the amount left would be Rs. 50,400 which if multiplied by applying the multiplier of 18, the amount towards loss of dependency would come to Rs. 9,07,200. In addition, the claimants are also entitled for a lump sum compensation of Rs. 40,000 towards conventional heads to make the total compensation payable at Rs. 9,47,200 which is rounded off at Rs. 9,50,000. Thus, it is ordered that the claimants shall now be entitled for a total compensation of Rs. 9,50,000 instead of Rs. 2,01,000 as awarded by the Tribunal. 8. The above enhanced amount of compensation shall also carry interest at the same rate as awarded by the Tribunal. 9. Accordingly, the appeal of the appellant-claimants stands allowed and disposed of.