JUDGMENT : This appeal is filed by the claimants challenging the judgment and award dated 25.06.2015, passed by the Senior Civil Judge (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Tribunal’ for short) at Nelamangala in MVC No.53/2014, whereby the Tribunal has granted compensation of Rs.14,16,000/- with interest @ 6% p.a. 2. Brief facts of the case are that on 03.07.2013 at about 7.00 p.m., one Shivakumar was standing in front of Karle Factory to cross the road, at that time, a car bearing registration No.KA-13-A-7551 came from Nelamangala towards Hassan driven by its driver, in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against Shivakumar. Consequently, he sustained injuries all over the body and head injury. Immediately, after the accident, he was shifted to Government Hospital, Nelamangala and then, shifted to Nimhans Hospital, Bengaluru. Thereafter, for further treatment, he was admitted in Health India Hospital and there he was operated. He was inpatient for a period of 2 ½ months and succumbed to the injuries in the Health India Hospital, Bengaluru on 14.09.2013. The claimants, who are wife, children and mother of the deceased Shivakumar have filed a claim petition before the MACT, Nelamangala in MVC No.53/2014. To establish their case, they have examined two witnesses as PW.1 and PW.2 and got marked 130 documents as Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.130. On the other hand, respondent-Insurance company neither examined any witnesses nor marked any documents. On appreciation of oral and documentary evidence, the Tribunal has granted compensation of Rs.14,16,000/- with interest @ 6% p.a. Being not satisfied with the compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the claimants/appellants have filed this appeal seeking enhancement of compensation. 3. Sri. Shripad V. Shastri, learned counsel appearing for the appellants contended that at the time of the accident, deceased was aged about 42 years. He was doing contractor work and was earning Rs.20,000/-per month. The Tribunal has assessed the monthly income of the deceased at Rs.7,000/- per month, which is on the lower side. Secondly, he has contended that the Tribunal has not considered future prospects while assessing the notional income of the deceased. He further submits that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal towards conventional heads is on the lower side. In support of his contention, he has relied upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of National Insurance Company Vs. Pranay Sethi reported in AIR 2017 SC 5157 . He further submits that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal towards conventional heads is on the lower side. In support of his contention, he has relied upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of National Insurance Company Vs. Pranay Sethi reported in AIR 2017 SC 5157 . Thirdly, he has contended that as per the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Magma General Insurance Company Limited Vs. Nanu Ram and others reported in 2018 ACJ 2782 , parents are entitled for filial consortium and children are entitled for parental consortium. Therefore, he sought for enhancement of the compensation. 4. Per contra, Sri. H.N. Keshava Prashanth, learned counsel appearing for the insurance company contended that even though the claimants claimed that deceased was earning Rs.20,000/- per month, they have not produced any documents to establish the same. Secondly, he has contended that as per the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Pranay Sethi (supra), claimants are entitled for compensation of Rs.70,000/- towards conventional heads. Therefore, he sought for dismissal of the appeal. 5. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties. 6. It is not in dispute that Shivakumar died in a road traffic accident occurred on 03.07.2013 due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the car bearing registration No.KA-13-A-7551. Even though the claimants claimed that deceased was earning Rs.20,000/- per month, they have not produced any documents to establish the same. Under the circumstances, the Tribunal was left with no other option, but to asses the income of the deceased notionally. While assessing the notional income, the Tribunal has considered the notional income of the deceased at Rs.7,000/- which is on the lower side. In catena of cases, this Court is considering the Chart prepared by the Lok Adalath for the purpose of deciding the cases. According to the Chart, for an accident of the year, 2013, the income has to be taken notionally at Rs.8,000/- per month. Taking into consideration the age and avocation of the deceased and considering the chart prepared by the Lok-Adalath, I am of the opinion that the notional income of the deceased has to be considered at Rs.8,000/- per month. At the time of the accident, deceased was aged about 42 years and the multiplier applicable to his age group is 14. Taking into consideration the age and avocation of the deceased and considering the chart prepared by the Lok-Adalath, I am of the opinion that the notional income of the deceased has to be considered at Rs.8,000/- per month. At the time of the accident, deceased was aged about 42 years and the multiplier applicable to his age group is 14. The Apex Court in the case of Pranay Sethi has opined that in case of deceased was self employed or on a fixed salary, an addition of 25% of the established income should be warrant, where the deceased was between the age group of 40 to 50 years. Accordingly, 25% of the income has to be added towards future prospects since as on the date of the accident deceased was aged about 42 years. Since dependents are more than four members, 1/4th has to be deducted for personal expenses from his income. Accordingly, loss of dependency has been reassessed as follows:- Monthly income of the deceased 8,000/- Add: 25% towards future prospects 2,000 – 10,000/- LESS: 1/4th towards personal expenses 2,500/- Actual monthly income 7,500/- Multiplier 14 Loss of dependency (7500 x 12x 14) 12,60,000/- 7. The Apex Court in the case of Pranay Sethi (supra) has opined that for conventional heads, namely, loss of estate, loss of consortium and funeral expenses, the claimants are entitled for a sum of Rs.15,000/-, Rs.40,000/- and Rs.15,000/- respectively. Accordingly, the compensation under these heads are reassessed. 8. The Apex Court in the case of Magma (supra) has held that parents are entitled for filial consortium. In case on hand, claimant No.5, who is mother of the deceased lost her son during her life time, at the old age of 76 years. Children are valid for love and affection and companionship. Taking into consideration of the same, claimant No.5 is entitled for compensation of Rs.40,000/- for loss of love and affection. 9. Claimant Nos.2 to 4 are sons of deceased Shivakumar and they lost their father at their young age. At the time of the accident, children are minors and aged about 9 to 13 years. Due to death of their father, they lost their parental aid, protection, affection, society discipline, guidance and training. Hence, claimant Nos.2, 3 and 4 are entitled for compensation of Rs.40,000/- each towards loss of love and affection. At the time of the accident, children are minors and aged about 9 to 13 years. Due to death of their father, they lost their parental aid, protection, affection, society discipline, guidance and training. Hence, claimant Nos.2, 3 and 4 are entitled for compensation of Rs.40,000/- each towards loss of love and affection. The compensation awarded by the Tribunal towards on other heads are remained intact. 10. Accordingly, appeal is allowed in part. The judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is modified as follows: Compensation under different Heads As awarded by the Tribunal (Rs.) As awarded by this Court (Rs.) Loss of Dependency 8,82,000/- 12,60,000/- Medical Expenses 2,49,000/- 2,49,000/- Nutritious Food and attendant charges 50,000/- 50,000/- Funeral Expenses 25,000/- 15,000/- Conveyance 10,000/- - Loss of consortium 1,00,000/- 40,000/- Loss of Estate - 15,000/- Loss of love and affection for appellant No.5 25,000/- 40,000/- Loss of love and affection for appellant Nos.2 to 4 (40000 x 3) 75,000/- 1,20,000/- Total 14,16,000/- 17,89,000/- The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the entire compensation amount along with an interest @ 6% per annum, from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of realization, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this judgment. The apportionment, release and fixed deposit shall be made as per the ratio adopted by the Tribunal.