JUDGMENT : 1. This appeal by the claimants calls in question the Judgment & Award dated 16.01.2017, whereby the MACT, Vijayapura having partly favoured their claim in MVC No.1580/2015 has awarded a compensation of Rs.13,64,000/-with interest @ 6% p.a. and with a condition of 60% of the compensation being kept in a Fixed Deposit in any Nationalized Bank; however, the claimants are permitted to draw the interest accruing periodically. The appeal is founded on the ground of inadequacy of compensation. 2. Notice to the 1st respondent is dispensed with vide order dated 09.08.2018. After service of notice, the 2nd respondent-Insurer having entered appearance through it’s learned Panel Counsel opposes the appeal making submission in justification of the impugned Judgment & Award. 3. Brief facts: (a) in an accident that happended on 07.02.2015 near Jainapur cross on Telagi-B.Bagewadi road, one Mr. Prabhakar Wali sustained fatal injuries and succumbed thereto at Sanjeevini Hospital, Vijayapura; the claimants being the widow and the children filed MVC No.1580/2015 claiming a compensation of Rs.38,80,000/-with 18% interest p.a.; the claim was resisted by the Insurer by filing the Written Statement; (b) to prove the claim, the claimants examined Smt. Danamma, the widow of the deceased as PW.1; one Mr. M.M. Kulkarni who was a colleague of the deceased in employment was examined as PW.2; in their deposition 13 documents came to be marked as per Exs.P1 to P13(a); these included the police papers, IMV report, post mortem report and medical records; although from the side of the Insurer none was put to witness box, 3 documents came to be marked as per Exs.R1 to R3 which are Authorisation Letter, Case Sheet and copy of Insurance Policy; (c) the MACT having considered the pleadings of the parties and weighed the evidentiary material on record had entered the Judgement & Award that are put in challenge by the claimants grieving that the compensation awarded is too much on the meger side. 4. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and having perused the appeal papers, this Court grants a small enhancement of compensation as under and for the following reasons: (i) the happening of the accident because of rash and negligent driving of the offending motorcycle beraing Reg. 4. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and having perused the appeal papers, this Court grants a small enhancement of compensation as under and for the following reasons: (i) the happening of the accident because of rash and negligent driving of the offending motorcycle beraing Reg. No.KA-28/EG-2398 and consequent death of breadwinner of the claimants’ family has been established by cogent evidentiary material; the age of the deceased being 58 years is also not in challenge; similarly the petitioner being in the permanent employment as a Peon in the school was drawing a salary of Rs.26,915/-p.m. is proved by the school records coupled with deposition of PW.2, his cross-examination having yielded nothing worth mentioning; (ii) the MACT has arrived at a right conclusion as to the ‘Medical Expenses’ on the basis of evidentiary material and awarded a sum of Rs.74,624/-; regard being had to the age of the deceased being 58, right Multiplier is taken, too; the MACT has awarded Rs.50,000/-to the 1st claimant, widow as compensation for the ‘loss of consortium’ of married life and no compensation under the similar head is awarded to the other claimants who happened to be a daughter and a son of the deceased; this ought to have been awarded in view of Apex Court decision in Satinder Kaur @ Satwinder Kaur & Ors. vs. United India Insurance Co. Ltd. in Civil Appeal No.2705/2020 dated 30.06.2020 at the rate of Rs.40,000/-to each of them; this having not been done, there is a lacuna in the judgment which needs to be set at right by awarding additional compensation of Rs.80,000/-under this head; (iii) there is force in the contention of the claimants that an incremental value ought to have been added to the ‘loss of future income’ in view of Pranay Sethi case (2017) 16 SCC 680 ; this having not been done, the impugned judgment is infected with another infirmity which needs to be addressed; regard being had to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, a sum of Rs.56,000/-is awarded under this head, keeping in view the short remainder of one and half years of service for superannuation of the deceased. In the above circumstances and no other ground having been urged, this appeal succeeds in part; the impugned Judgment & Award having been modified, the compensation is enhanced from Rs.13,64,000/-to Rs.15,00,000/-(Rupees Fifteen Lakh); this enhanced amount shall carry interest at the same rate of interest i.e., 6% p.a. from the date of petition till realisation; the respondent-Insurer shall make good the differential before long.