JUDGMENT S.G. Pandit, J. - The claimants are in appeal praying for enhancement of compensation not being satisfied with the compensation awarded in the judgment and award dated 23.03.2013 in MVC No.988/2012 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal IX, Bellary. 2. Claimants are the husband and children of deceased Smt. Boya Marekka @ Jangli Marekka. It is stated that on 22.06.2012, when the deceased was proceeding as a pillion rider along with one Nayukulu Lingappa in TVS XL Super Heavy Duty Moped bearing registration No.AP-02/AQ-0636 from Rekulkunta village towards Pullakunta village, one APSRTC bus bearing registration No.AP-01/Z-0158 came in a rash and negligent manner, with high speed from hillside and dashed against the said moped, due to which the deceased fell down and the rear back wheel of the bus ran over the head of the deceased. The deceased succumbed to the injuries on the spot. The deceased was aged 55 years as on the date of the accident and it is stated that she was earning Rs.5,000/- per month by fruit vending business. 3. On issuance of notice, respondent No.1 remained absent and respondent No.2/Corporation appeared before the Tribunal and filed its statement of objections denying the entire claim petition averments. It is contended that the accident occurred solely due to the negligence of rider of the moped and also contended that the rider of the moped has also contributed to the occurrence of the accident. 4. In order to substantiate their contentions, Claimant No.2 examined himself as P.W.1 and got marked Exs.P1 to P.8. No evidence was let in by the respondent/corporation. The Tribunal on scrutiny of the entire material on record, awarded total compensation of Rs.3,44,300/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till realization on the following heads: 1. Loss of dependency Rs.3,16,800/- 2. Loss of love and affection Rs. 10,000/- 3. Loss of estate Rs. 10,000/- 4. Towards transportation of dead Body and funeral expenses Rs. 7,500/- TOTAL Rs.3,44,300/- 5. While awarding the above compensation, the Tribunal assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.3,600/- per month, notionally and deducted 1/3rd of it towards personal expenses of the deceased. Not being satisfied with the quantum of compensation, the claimants are before this Court praying for enhancing the compensation. 6. 7,500/- TOTAL Rs.3,44,300/- 5. While awarding the above compensation, the Tribunal assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.3,600/- per month, notionally and deducted 1/3rd of it towards personal expenses of the deceased. Not being satisfied with the quantum of compensation, the claimants are before this Court praying for enhancing the compensation. 6. Heard the learned counsel for appellants/claimants and the learned counsels for respondent/corporation and perused the material on record. 7. The learned counsel for the appellants/claimants would submit that the income of the deceased assessed by the Tribunal at Rs.3600/- per month is on the lower side and prays for enhancing the same. It is contended that the deceased was earning Rs.5,000/- per month by fruit vending business. Further, the learned counsel contends that the Tribunal failed to award any compensation on the head of future prospects. He submits that since the deceased was aged 55 years as on the date of the accident, the claimants would be entitled for adding of 10% of the assessed income towards future prospects. He also contends that the compensation awarded on conventional heads is also on the lower side. Thus, prays for enhancing the compensation. 8. Per contra, the learned counsels appearing for the respondent/corporation would submit that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just compensation, which needs no interference. It is further submitted that the claimants having placed on record no material to establish the income of the deceased, the notional income assessed by the Tribunal is proper and thus, pray for dismissal of the appeal. 9. Having heard the learned counsel for parties and on perusal of material on record, the following points would arise for our consideration:- i) Whether the income assessed by the Tribunal at Rs.3,600/- per month of the deceased is proper and correct? ii) Whether the claimants would be entitled for adding 10% of the assessed income towards future prospects? 10. The answer to the above points would be in the negative and in affirmative, respectively, for the following:- REASONS 11. Admittedly, the accident is of the year 2012 and the notional income assessed by the Tribunal at Rs.3,600/- is on the lower side. The claimants have stated that the deceased was carrying a fruit vending business and was earning Rs.5,000/- per month. Admittedly, the accident is of the year 2012 and the notional income assessed by the Tribunal at Rs.3,600/- is on the lower side. The claimants have stated that the deceased was carrying a fruit vending business and was earning Rs.5,000/- per month. This Court and Lok Adalaths while settling the accident claims of the year 2012 assessed the income at Rs.6,500/- per month, notionally. Since the claimants themselves have stated in their claim petition that the deceased was earning Rs.5,000/- per month by carrying fruit vending business, we deem it appropriate to assess the income of the deceased at Rs.5,000/- per month as claimed by the claimants. The Tribunal failed to award compensation on the head of future prospects. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of National Insurance Company Ltd vs. Pranay Sethi and others, (2017) AIR SC 5157 has held that the claimants would be entitled for compensation on the head of future prospects @ 10% of the assessed income when the deceased was aged between 50 to 60 years. The Hon'ble Apex Court has also clarified in subsequent decision in the case of Oriental Insurance Company vs. Hem Raj and others, (2018) ACJ 05 (SC) that the claimants would be entitled for adding of future prospects even when the income is determined notionally or on guesswork. Hence, we deem it proper to add 10% of the assessed income towards future prospects, since the deceased was aged 55 years as on the date of the accident. After adding 10% of the assessed income towards future prospects, the monthly income of the deceased would be Rs.5,500/-. Further, 1/3rd of the said amount needs to be deducted towards personal expenses of the deceased, which would work out to Rs.3,666/- per month. Since the deceased died at her age of 55 years, the appropriate multiplier would be 11' and thus, the claimants would be entitled for Rs.4,83,912/- (Rs.3,666 x 12 x 11 = Rs.4,83,912/-) towards loss of dependency including future prospects. 12. The Tribunal awarded compensation on conventional heads to the tune of Rs.27,500/- which is on the lower side. The claimants would be entitled for Rs.77,000/- towards conventional heads as held by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Pranay Sethi (supra). 12. The Tribunal awarded compensation on conventional heads to the tune of Rs.27,500/- which is on the lower side. The claimants would be entitled for Rs.77,000/- towards conventional heads as held by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Pranay Sethi (supra). Thus, the claimants would be entitled for the following modified compensation:- Towards loss of dependency including future prospects (Rs.3666 x 11 x 12 = Rs.4,83,912/-) Rs.4,83,912/- Towards conventional heads Rs. 77,000/- Total Rs.5,60,912/- 13. The claimants would be entitled to the total compensation of Rs.5,60,912/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till realization as against Rs.3,44,300/- awarded by the Tribunal. 14. The respondent/corporation is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of petition till realization within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in part. Draw the modified award accordingly.