JUDGMENT : Pushpendra Singh Bhati, J. This misc. appeal under Section 173 of Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 has been preferred claiming the following reliefs: "It is, therefore, humbly prayed that the appeal may kindly be allowed with cost, impugned award may be modified, amount of compensation and rate of interest may kindly be enhanced." 2. The unfortunate accident in this case had happened on 14.12.2004 at Fatehpura-Siphon Circle Road, when the appellant was travelling on a motorcycle driven by her husband Tulsi Giri. The motorcycle was hit by a truck being driven by respondent No.3 in a rash and negligent manner. Tulsi Giri, the husband of the appellant expired as a result of such accident. The claim petition was thus, filed and the learned Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 1,22,000/- only as compensation. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant makes a limited submission that the age of the deceased should be taken as 45 years and also while treating him to be earning minimum of the unskilled wages, the computation of the compensation should be done while applying the parameters of the law laid down by the Apex Court in National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi, (2017) AIR SC 5157 and Sarla Verma Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation, (2009) 2 ACTC(Raj) 849. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant further submits that the fact of the deceased, at the relevant time being working at Dhuni as a Chunai Labour is proved by the statement of his wife. 5. Learned counsel for the respondents however, submits that the age of the deceased has been drawn from the postmortem report, which reflects the same to be 55 years, and thus, ought not to be challenged. 6. Learned counsel for the respondents further submits that the notional income has been rightly arrived at, as no proof of income has been given, though the appellant is not in a position to deny that the deceased was working as Chunai Labour. She also submits that it is a ten years old matter and the parameters of National Insurance Company Vs. Pranay Sethi and Sarla Verma Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation (supra) thus, would not apply. 7. She also submits that it is a ten years old matter and the parameters of National Insurance Company Vs. Pranay Sethi and Sarla Verma Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation (supra) thus, would not apply. 7. After hearing learned counsel for the parties as well as perusing the record of the case, this Court is of the opinion that the age has been rightly taken by the learned Tribunal as 55 years on the basis of the postmortem report. However, once the appellant has deposed that her husband was working as Chunai Labour and was also sitting at Dhuni then if the wage could not be determined, the minimum wages should have been taken for the purposes of necessary compensation. 8. This Court however, finds that the parameters of National Insurance Company Vs. Pranay Sethi and Sarla Verma Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation (supra) will apply in the present case and while treating the age of the deceased to be 55 years and while treating him to be having minimum wages as Rs. 1898/- per month, this Court arrives at the following compensation: Monthly wages (as per minimum wages of unskilled person prevalent in the year of 2004) 1898 Future prospects (10% of 1898 = 189.8) 1898+189.8 2087.8 Deduction of 1/3 (1/3 of 2087.8 = 695.93) (2087.8 695.93) 1391.87 Annual Income (1391.87x12) 16702.44 Multiplier of 11 (16702.44 x 11) 183726.84 Others 70000 Total compensation 253726.84 Claim deposited 122000 Enhanced amount 131726.84 9. Thus, the enhanced amount to be paid by the respondents, which is Rs.1,31,726/-, shall carry interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the actual payment is made. The enhanced amount is to be paid within two months from today, failing which the due amount shall carry interest @ 9% per annum for the subsequent period (i.e. after two months from today) till actual payment is made. 10. The present appeal stands disposed of accordingly. All the pending applications also stand disposed of.