ORDER 1. This Miscellaneous Appeal under section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, has been filed against the Award dated 24th October, 2019 passed by Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sheopur in Motor Accident Claim Case No. 22/2019 by which the claim petition filed by the respondents No. 1 and 2/ claimants has been allowed and an amount of Rs. 13,87,703/- has been awarded to them. 2. The present appeal has been filed by the appellant/ Insurance Company on the ground that the Claims Tribunal has awarded the exorbitant amount under various heads. It is further submitted that the Claims Tribunal has excessively assessed the salary of the deceased as well as the compensation amount under various heads. It is further submitted that since the claimants have failed to prove that the deceased was a self-employed person, therefore, should not have awarded future prospects. Further, it is submitted that since the deceased was not having any licence to drive the vehicle, therefore, it is possible that he might not be able to drive the motorcycle efficiently which may also contribute to the accident. 3. Per contra, the counsel for the caveator has supported the award passed by the Claims Tribunal. 4. Since the factum of accident and liability of Insurance Company is not in dispute, therefore, it is suffice to mention here that on 14.2.2019, deceased Dhanaj Gurjar met with a vehicular accident and breathed his last on 15.2.2019 in MBS Hospital, Kota, Rajasthan. The age of the deceased is also not in dispute. Accordingly, it is held that the deceased was thirty years of age. 5. So far as the income of the deceased is concerned, in the claim petition, the claimants had alleged that the deceased was working as a mason and was earning Rs. 500/- per day and his monthly income was Rs. 15,000/-. The Claims Tribunal, after appreciating the evidence, has come to a conclusion that the claimants have failed to prove that the deceased was working as a mason and accordingly, the Claims Tribunal has treated the deceased as an unskilled labourer and after applying collector rate which is payable to the unskilled labourer, came to a conclusion that the daily income of the deceased was Rs. 284/- and after multiplying the same with 30 days, it was held that the monthly income of the deceased was Rs. 8,520/-. 6. 284/- and after multiplying the same with 30 days, it was held that the monthly income of the deceased was Rs. 8,520/-. 6. It is a matter of common knowledge that an unskilled labourer does not get work for the entire month. The claimants have not examined any witness with regard to the income of the deceased. Furthermore, the Collector rate fixed for an unskilled labourer working in the Industry has been applied but the same cannot be applied to any other unskilled labourer because no document has been filed by the claimants to show that the deceased was working as an unskilled labourer in any industry. Therefore, this Court is of the considered opinion that the Claims Tribunal has committed a material illegality by calculating the notional income of the deceased on the basis of wages payable to an unskilled labourer working in the industry. The Claims Tribunal has ignored the fact that an unskilled labourer does not get the work for the entire month. As per Schedule-II of section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act, the notional income of an unemployed person has been provided as Rs. 15,000/- in the year 1994, whereas the incident took place on 14.2.2019. Thus, 25 long years have passed after the introduction of Schedule-II of section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act. Under these circumstances, this Court is of the considered opinion that the monthly income of the deceased can be taken as Rs. 5,000/- per month. 7. Since the deceased was a bachelor, therefore, in the light of the judgment passed by the Supreme Court in the case of Sarla Verma v. DTC, reported in (2009) 6 SCC 121 , it is held that 50% of the income of the deceased has to be deducted towards his personal expenses. The deceased was aged about 30 years at the time of accident, therefore, the Claims Tribunal has rightly applied the multiplier of 17. The Supreme Court in the case of National Insurance Company Limited v. Pranay Sethi, reported in 2018 (1) JLJ 200 = (2017) 16 SCC 680 has held that a self-employed private person is also entitled for future prospects, but since in the present case, the claimants have failed to prove that the deceased was a self-employed private person, therefore, in the considered opinion that the claimants are not entitled for future prospects. The Claims Tribunal has awarded Rs. The Claims Tribunal has awarded Rs. 40,000/- towards loss of consortium. Since the deceased was a bachelor, therefore, the amount of Rs. 40,000/- for the loss of consortium could not have been awarded. On the contrary, this Court is of the considered opinion that Rs. 40,000/- can be awarded for loss of love and affection as a mother has lost her son. Therefore, the amount of Rs. 40,000/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal for loss of consortium is maintained under the head of love and affection. The amount of Rs. 14,143/- awarded by the claims Tribunal towards medical expenses is also maintained. 8. Accordingly, Natibai/respondent No. 2 (mother of the deceased) shall be entitled for the following compensation amount: S. No. Head Amount 1 Monthly Income of the deceased Rs. 5,000.00 2 Personal Expenses x ½ Rs. 2,500.00 3 Monthly Loss of Dependency Rs. 2,500.00 4 Yearly loss of dependency Rs. 30,000.00 5 Multiplier x 17 Rs. 5,10,000.00 6 Loss of Estate Rs. 15,000.00 7 Funeral Expenses Rs. 15,000.00 8 Loss of Love and affection Rs. 40,000.00 9 Medical expenses Rs. 14,143.00 Total Rs. 5,94,143.00 9. The total amount of Rs. 13,87,703/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal is reduced to Rs. 5,94,143/-. 10. The other terms and conditions of the Award shall remain intact. 11. With the aforesaid modification, the Award dated 24th October, 2019 passed by Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sheopur in Motor Accident Claim Case No. 22/2019 is hereby affirmed. 12. Accordingly, this appeal stands disposed of.