JUDGMENT : 1. MFA No.5440/2016 has been filed by the Insurance Company whereas MFA No.6901/2016 has been filed by the claimants under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for short) being aggrieved by the judgment dated 30.04.2016 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal. Since both the appeals arise from the same accident and from the same judgment, they were heard together and are being decided by this common judgment. 2. Facts leading to filing of these appeals briefly stated are that on 18.01.2014 at about 10.15 p.m., the deceased Chennappa G. was walking by the side of the road at Gandhinagar in Vorkady Village in Kasaragod District. At that time, one Hyundai Verna car bearing Registration No.KA03 MS8106 which came from Hosangady side towards Anekal, which was being driven in a rash and negligent manner by its driver, dashed against the deceased Chennappa G. As a result of the aforesaid accident, the deceased was thrown on the road and sustained grievous injuries all over the body and succumbed to the injuries on his way to the hospital. 3. Thereupon, the claimants filed a petition under Section 166(1) of the Act, in which inter aliait was pleaded that the deceased at the time of accident was aged about 56 years and was working as a book seller in Nava Karnataka Publication, Bangalore and used to visit different places for holding camps for sale of books such as in Dharwad, Gadag, Bijapur and Raichur and other parts of the State of Karnataka. It was pleaded that he used to earn Rs.50,000/-p.m. It was also averred that the accident took place on account of rash and negligent driving of the Hyundai Verna car by its driver. The claimants claimed compensation to the tune of Rs.80,00,000/-along with interest. 4. The respondent No.2 filed its written statement in which the averments made in the claim petition were denied. The accident, income of the deceased as well as the loss sustained by the claimants on account of the death of the deceased and the expenditure incurred by the claimants for transportation of the dead body, etc. were denied. It was pleaded that the amount of compensation claimed by the claimants is exorbitant and is excessive and the claimants are not entitled to any compensation. 5. were denied. It was pleaded that the amount of compensation claimed by the claimants is exorbitant and is excessive and the claimants are not entitled to any compensation. 5. The Claims Tribunal, on the basis of the pleadings of the parties, framed issues and recorded the evidence. In order to prove their case, claimant No.1 examined herself as PW1, and Mr.Divya Shankar B. as PW2, and got exhibited 26 documents viz., Ex.P1 to Ex.P26. However, the respondents neither examined any witness nor produced any evidence. The Claims Tribunal, vide impugned judgment, interaliaheld that the accident took place on account of rash and negligent driving of the Hyundai Verna car by its driver. The Claims Tribunal assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.20,000/- p.m. and held that the claimants are entitled to compensation to the tune of Rs.22,38,000/- along with interest @ 6% p.a. In the aforesaid factual background, these appeals have been filed. 6. Learned counsel for the claimants submitted that the Tribunal grossly erred in treating the income of the deceased only at Rs.20,000/p.m. and the income of the deceased ought to have been assessed at Rs.50,000/- p.m. On the other hand, learned counsel for the Insurance Company submitted that the compensation which has been awarded by the Tribunal is in contravention of the principles laid down by the Supreme Court with regard to assessment of compensation in ‘NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD Vs. PRANAY SETHI’, AIR 2017 SC 5157 . 7. We have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record. The only issue which arises for consideration in these appeals, is with regard to quantum of compensation. Admittedly, the deceased was aged about 56 years at the time of accident. The claimants have not adduced any evidence with regard to the income of the deceased. However, the deceased was a B.Com. graduate and was admittedly working as book seller and from perusal of Ex.P14 and Ex.P15, it is evident that deceased was permitted to sell books at various places. The deceased used to pay premiums in respect of the policies which were purchased by him which is evident from Ex.P8 to Ex.P12. The deceased was also assessed to income tax and was an income tax payee. The deceased used to pay premiums in respect of the policies which were purchased by him which is evident from Ex.P8 to Ex.P12. The deceased was also assessed to income tax and was an income tax payee. Therefore, the Tribunal has rightly assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.20,000/p.m. To the aforesaid amount, an amount of 10% has to be added on account of future prospects in view of the law laid down by the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in ‘NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED Vs. PRANAY SETHI AND OTHERS’ AIR 2017 SC 5157 . Thus, the monthly income of the deceased comes to Rs.22,000/. Out of which, 1/3rd of the amount has to be deducted on account of personal expenses of the deceased and therefore, the monthly dependency comes to Rs.14,666.67/. Taking into account the age of the deceased which was 56 years at the time of accident, multiplier of 9 has to be applied. Therefore, the amount of dependency is assessed Rs.15,84,000/-(14,666.67 x 12 x 9). In view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in ‘MAGMA GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs. NANU RAM’ 2018 ACJ 2782 , which has been subsequently clarified by the Supreme Court in ‘UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs. SATINDER KAUR AND ORS.’ IN CIVIL APPEAL NO.2705/2020 DECIDED ON 30.06.2020, both the claimants are entitled to Rs.40,000/each on account of loss of consortium and loss of love and affection. Thus, the claimants are held entitled to a sum of Rs.80,000/- under this head. In addition, the claimants are entitled to Rs.30,000/- on account of loss of estate and funeral expenses. Thus, in all, the claimants are entitled to total compensation of Rs.16,94,000/-. Needless to state that the aforesaid amount of compensation shall carry interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of petition till payment is made. To the aforesaid extent, the judgment of the Claims Tribunal is modified. The amount in deposit shall be transmitted to the Claims Tribunal for disbursement to the claimants. In the result, the appeals are disposed of.