JUDGMENT 1. This appeal under Sec. 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act', for short) has been filed by the claimants being aggrieved by the judgment dtd. 26/5/2012 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bengaluru in MVC No.6370/2011. 2. Facts giving rise to the filing of the appeal briefly stated are that on 24/7/2011 at about 07.20 p.m. when the deceased S. Satyanarayana was walking carefully and cautiously near Trilight junction, Race Course Road, Bengaluru, at that time, the driver of the Car bearing Registration No.KA-05-NH-6433 came in a rash and negligent manner and at high speed, endangering to human life and dashed against him. As a result of the aforesaid accident, the deceased sustained grievous injuries and succumbed to the injuries. 3. The claimants filed a petition under Sec. 166 of the Act seeking compensation for the death of the deceased along with interest. 4. On service of summons, the respondent Nos.1 and 2 being the insurer and the owner of the offending vehicle have appeared through counsel and filed written statement in which the averments made in the petition were denied. The age, occupation and income of the deceased are denied. It was further pleaded that the quantum of compensation claimed by the claimants is exorbitant. Hence, they sought for dismissal of the petition. 5. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the Claims Tribunal framed the issues and thereafter recorded the evidence. The claimants, in order to prove their case, examined claimant No.1 as PW-1 and got exhibited documents namely Ex.P1 to Ex.P10. On behalf of respondents, no witness was examined but got exhibited a document namely Ex.R1. The Claims Tribunal, by the impugned judgment, inter alia, held that the accident took place on account of rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle by its driver, as a result of which, the deceased sustained injuries and succumbed to the injuries. The Tribunal further held that the claimants are entitled to a compensation of Rs.1,50,000.00 along with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. and directed the Insurance Company to deposit the compensation amount along with interest. Being aggrieved, this appeal has been filed. 6. The Tribunal further held that the claimants are entitled to a compensation of Rs.1,50,000.00 along with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. and directed the Insurance Company to deposit the compensation amount along with interest. Being aggrieved, this appeal has been filed. 6. The learned counsel for the claimants has raised the following contentions: Firstly, the claimants claim that the deceased was aged about 70 years at the time of the accident and he was earning Rs.15,000.00 per month by working as Typist at Legislatures Home. But the Tribunal has awarded a global compensation of Rs.1,50,000.00 is on lower side. Secondly, the claimants are entirely depending upon the income of the deceased. In view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of MAGMA GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. -V- NANU RAM [ 2018 ACJ 2782 ], each of the claimants are entitled for compensation of Rs.40,000.00 under the head of 'loss of parental consortium'. But the Tribunal has not considered this aspect of the matter. Hence, he prays for allowing the appeal. 7. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the Insurance Company has raised the following counter-contentions: Firstly, the claimants are major son and major daughter and they are not depending upon the income of the deceased. Secondly, at the time of the accident, the deceased was aged 70 years. But the claimants have not produced any document to establish the age of the deceased. Therefore, the Tribunal considering the age and avocation of the deceased, has rightly awarded global compensation of Rs.1,50,000.00. Hence, he prays for dismissal of the appeal. 8. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the records. 9. It is not in dispute that deceasedS.Satyanarayana died in the road traffic accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle by its driver. The claimants claim that deceased was earning Rs.15,000.00 per month. But they have not produced any documents to prove the income of the deceased. In the absence of proof of income, the notional income has to be assessed. As per the guidelines issued by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority, for the accident taken place in the year 2011, the notional income of the deceased has to be taken at Rs.6,500.00 p.m. The claimants are the major son and major daughter and they have their own source of income. As per the guidelines issued by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority, for the accident taken place in the year 2011, the notional income of the deceased has to be taken at Rs.6,500.00 p.m. The claimants are the major son and major daughter and they have their own source of income. Considering the same, it is appropriate to deduct 50% of the income of the deceased towards 'personal expenses'. Thus the monthly income of the deceased comes to Rs.3,250.00. The deceased was aged about 70 years at the time of the accident and multiplier applicable to his age group is 5'. Thus, the claimants are entitled to compensation of Rs.1,95,000.00 (Rs.3,250.00*12*5) on account of 'loss of dependency'. In addition, the claimants are entitled to compensation of Rs.15,000.00 on account of 'loss of estate' and compensation of Rs.15,000.00 on account of 'funeral expenses'. In view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of 'MAGMA GENERAL INSURANCE' (supra), claimants are entitled for compensation of Rs.40,000.00 each under the head of 'loss of parental consortium'. 10. Thus, the claimants are entitled to the following compensation: 11. In the result, the appeal is allowed in part. The judgment of the Claims Tribunal is modified. The claimants are entitled to a total compensation of Rs.3,05,000.00 as against Rs.1,50,000.00 awarded by the Tribunal. The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the compensation amount along with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of realization, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment.