JUDGMENT : 1. This appeal is filed by the claimants challenging the judgment and award passed in M.V.C.No.819/2015 dated 8.2.2017 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge and MACT, Maddur, questioning the quantum of compensation contending that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is meager. 2. The factual matrix of the case is that the deceased K.P.Puttaswamy was crossing NH4 service road from Vijaya Bank side at Dasarahalli, Bengaluru. At that time, a bus bearing registration No.KA51C1337 driven by its driver dashed against him. As a result, he sustained injuries and succumbed to the injuries. The respondent/insurer did not dispute the accident and the present appeal is filed only with regard to quantum of compensation. 3. The contention of the learned counsel for the appellants is that the Tribunal has committed an error in taking the income as Rs.6,000/per month and he was earning Rs.16,000/per month working as an employee in Malnad Ice Creams. The claimants to prove the same, have produced the salary certificate, but they have not examined the author of the document. Hence, the Tribunal did not believe the same and took the notional income as Rs.6,000/per month. 4. The accident had taken place in the year 2015. In the absence of any documentary proof with regard to income, the Tribunal ought to have taken the notional income at Rs.9,000/per month. The Tribunal committed an error in taking the income on lesser side as Rs.6,000/. The age of the deceased was 42 years as on the date of the accident and the Tribunal ought to have added 25% as future prospects. If that is added, it comes to Rs.11,250/per month. The claimants are wife, daughter and mother of the deceased. Hence 1/3rd has to be deducted out of the income. If the same is deducted, the loss of dependency comes to Rs.7,500/per month and annual income it is Rs.90,000/. The deceased was aged about 43 years and the relevant multiplier applicable is ‘14’. Having taken the multiplier as ‘14’ and taking the annual income at Rs.90,000/, the loss of dependency comes to Rs.12,60,000/(Rs.90,000/x 14). To that another Rs.70,000/is added under conventional heads. If that is added, the total compensation payable to the claimants comes to Rs.13,30,000/and hence the judgment and award of the Tribunal requires to be modified. 5. In view of the discussions made above, we pass the following: ORDER (i) The appeal is allowed. To that another Rs.70,000/is added under conventional heads. If that is added, the total compensation payable to the claimants comes to Rs.13,30,000/and hence the judgment and award of the Tribunal requires to be modified. 5. In view of the discussions made above, we pass the following: ORDER (i) The appeal is allowed. (ii) The impugned judgment and award is modified granting compensation of Rs.13,30,000/as against Rs.9,38,600/, payable along with interest at 6% per annum. (iii) The respondent/insurer is directed to deposit the amount within four weeks from today.