JUDGMENT : H.T. Narendra Prasad, J. 1. M.F.A.No.2839/2018 is filed by the Insurance Company challenging the judgment and award passed by the Prl. Senior Civil Judge and MACT, Madhugiri ('Tribunal' for short) dated 06.10.2017 in MVC No.1081/2016. Claimants have also preferred M.F.A.No. 5306/2018 against the same judgment and award seeking enhancement of compensation. Since the challenge is to the same judgment, both the appeals are clubbed, heard together and are being disposed of by this common order. 2. Brief Facts of the case: On 03.09.2016 at about 8.00 a.m. when the deceased Nagaraju was riding a motor cycle bearing registration No.KA50-W-3156 from Sriram Devara temple at Chinnenahalli Village, at that time a TATA ACE bearing registration No. KA-06-D-1284 came from opposite direction driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against Nagaraju. Due to the impact Nagaraju sustained grievous injuries and immediately he was shifted to Government Hospital, Madhurigi. Thereafter, for further treatment he was shifted to Hemavathi Hospital, Tumakuru, later on shifted to NIMHANS, Bengaluru and again he was shifted to Victoria Hospital, Bengaluru and while taking treatment he died at Victoria Hospital, Bengaluru on 10.09.2016. 3. XXX XXX XXX 4. The claimants are parents, brother and sister of the deceased. They have filed a claim petition in MVC No.1081/2016. To establish their claim they have examined two witnesses and marked 15 documents. On the other hand Insurance Company neither examined any witnesses nor filed documents. On appreciation of oral and documentary evidence, the Tribunal has granted a compensation of Rs.12,41,500/- with 9% interest. Being aggrieved by the same Insurance Company has filed an appeal in MFA No.2839/2018 for reduction of compensation. The claimants have filed an appeal in MFA No.5306/2018 for enhancement of compensation. 5. Sri. Sathisha T. learned counsel appearing for the claimants has contended that at the time of the accident the deceased was aged about 26 years. In view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of National Insurance Company Vs. Pranay Sethi, (2017) AIR SC 5157, claimants are entitled for addition of 40% of the income of the deceased for calculating the loss of dependency. Hence, he sought for enhancement of compensation. 6. In view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of National Insurance Company Vs. Pranay Sethi, (2017) AIR SC 5157, claimants are entitled for addition of 40% of the income of the deceased for calculating the loss of dependency. Hence, he sought for enhancement of compensation. 6. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the Insurance Company submitted that even though the claimants have claimed that the deceased was earning Rs.20,000/- p.m., they have not produced any document to establish the same. Tribunal is not justified in taking the income of the deceased as Rs.10,000/- p.m. In catena of cases, this Court has relied upon the chart prepared by this Court for the purpose of deciding the matters at Lok Adalath. According to the Chart, for an accident of the year 2016, the income should be taken notionally as Rs.9,500/- per month. 7. Secondly, he has contended that under conventional heads the Tribunal has granted excess compensation. Thirdly, he contended that as regards the interest portion is concerned, for the accident occurred in 2016 the Tribunal has ordered 9% p.a. which is on higher side. Hence, he sought for allowing the appeal by reducing the compensation. 8. Heard the learned counsel for both the parties and perused the records. 9. It is not in dispute that deceased Nagaraju met with an accident on 03.09.2016 due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of TATA ACE vehicle bearing registration No. KA-06-D-1284 and died on 10.09.2016. Even though the claimants have claimed that at the time of the accident the deceased was earning Rs.20,000/- p.m., they have not produced any documents to establish the same. While assessing the notional income, the Tribunal has taken the income of the deceased at Rs.10,000/- per month which is on the higher side. In catena of cases, this Court has relied upon the Chart prepared by this Court for the purpose of deciding the matters. According to the Chart, for the accident of the year 2016, the income should be taken notionally as Rs.9,500/- per month. Accordingly, the income of the deceased Nagaraju is considered as Rs.9,500/- p.m. 10. In catena of cases, this Court has relied upon the Chart prepared by this Court for the purpose of deciding the matters. According to the Chart, for the accident of the year 2016, the income should be taken notionally as Rs.9,500/- per month. Accordingly, the income of the deceased Nagaraju is considered as Rs.9,500/- p.m. 10. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Pranay Sethi and others (supra) has held that in case, the deceased was self-employed or on a fixed salary, an addition of 40% of the established income should be the warrant where the deceased was below the age of 40 years. In the case at hand, the deceased was aged about 26 years. Hence, an addition 40% of the income is added for calculation of loss of dependency. Accordingly, loss of dependency is calculated as below: Monthly income 9,500/- Add: 40% towards future prospects 3,800/- Total 13,300/- Less: 1/2 towards personal expenses 6,650/- Actual income 6,650/- Multiplier 17 Loss of dependency 6,650 x 12 x 17 13,56,400/- 11. As far as conventional heads is concerned, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Pranay Sethi and others (Supra) has held that for loss of estate and funeral expenses Rs.15,000/- each has to be granted. Accordingly, compensation has been awarded at Rs.15,000/- each for loss of estate and funeral expenses. In view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Magma General Insurance Company Limited Vs. Nanu Ram and others, (2018) ACJ 2782, the compensation has been reduced from Rs.1,00,000/- to Rs.80,000/- under the category of love and affection. Accordingly, towards love and affection Rs.80,000/- has been granted. 12. The judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is modified as under: Heads of compensation Amount awarded by the Tribunal Amount awarded by this Court Loss of Dependency 10,20,000 13,56,600 Loss of love and affection 1,00,000 80,000 Loss of Estate 80,000 15,000 Funeral Expenses 25,000 15,000 Medical Expenses 6,500 6,500 Transportation 10,000 - Total 12,41,500 14,73,100 13. In respect of interest is concerned, learned counsel appearing for the Insurance Company has relied on RBI guidelines. As per the RBI guidelines, for the year 2016, interest rate of 6.25% has been fixed. Accordingly, the interest has been reduced from 9% to 6.25%. 14. Accordingly, both the appeals are allowed in part. In respect of interest is concerned, learned counsel appearing for the Insurance Company has relied on RBI guidelines. As per the RBI guidelines, for the year 2016, interest rate of 6.25% has been fixed. Accordingly, the interest has been reduced from 9% to 6.25%. 14. Accordingly, both the appeals are allowed in part. The Insurance Company is directed to deposit with the learned Tribunal, the entire compensation amount, along with an interest @ 6.25% per annum, from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of realization, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this judgment. The Tribunal is directed to disburse the amount in terms of the award passed by the Tribunal after due verification. The amount in deposit is directed to be transmitted to the Tribunal, forthwith.