JUDGMENT : H.T. Narendra Prasad, J. 1. This appeal under Section 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 dated 19.03.2018 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bengaluru (SCCH-25) in MVC No. 4330/2017. 2. Facts giving rise to the filing of the appeal briefly stated are that on 27.06.2017 at about 8.45 a.m. when the deceased Giriyappa was proceeding by walk at 14th Cross, Peenya Industrial Area, Bangalore and he was crossing the road near post office from west to east, at that time, a BMTC bus bearing registration No. KA-57/F-0777 which was being driven in a rash and negligent manner, dashed against the deceased. As a result of the aforesaid accident, the deceased sustained grievous injuries and succumbed to the injuries on 28.06.2017. 3. The claimants filed a petition under Section 166 of the Act seeking compensation for the death of the deceased along with interest. 4. On service of summons, the respondent 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 pleaded that the quantum of compensation claimed by the claimants is exorbitant. Hence, he 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.P12. On behalf of respondents, one witness was examined as RW-1 and no documents were got exhibited. 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. 2,50,000/-along with interest at the rate of 8% p.a. and directed the Corporation 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. 2,50,000/-along with interest at the rate of 8% p.a. and directed the Corporation 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 80 years at the time of the accident and he was earning Rs. 10,000/-per month by working as a Security Guard. But the Tribunal is not justified in taking the monthly income of the deceased as merely as Rs. 6,000/-. Secondly, since there are four dependents, the Tribunal instead of deducting 1/3rd of the income of the deceased towards personal expenses, has deducted 50%. Thirdly, as per 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/-under the head of 'loss of love and affection and consortium'. Fourthly, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal under the conventional heads is on the lower side. Hence, he prays for allowing the appeal. 7. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the Corporation has raised the following counter-contentions: Firstly, even though the claimants claim that the deceased was earning Rs. 10,000/-per month as a Security Guard, the same is not established by the claimants by producing documents. Therefore, the Tribunal has rightly assessed the income of the deceased notionally. Secondly, claimant No. 1 is the wife, claimant No. 2 is the married daughter and claimant Nos. 3 and 4 are the major sons of the deceased and they are not depending upon the income of the deceased. Considering the age of the deceased and there are major sons, the Tribunal has rightly deducted 50% of the income of the deceased towards personal expenses. Thirdly, on appreciation of oral and documentary evidence and considering the age and avocation of the deceased, the overall compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable. Lastly, in view of judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of MS.JOYEETA BOSE AND OTHERS vs. VENKATESHAN.V AND OTHERS (MFA 5896/2018 and connected matters disposed of on 24.8.2020), the claimants are entitled for 6% interest but the Tribunal has granted 8% interest is on the higher side. Lastly, in view of judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of MS.JOYEETA BOSE AND OTHERS vs. VENKATESHAN.V AND OTHERS (MFA 5896/2018 and connected matters disposed of on 24.8.2020), the claimants are entitled for 6% interest but the Tribunal has granted 8% interest is on the higher side. 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 Giriyappa 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. 10,000/-per month. Even as per the guidelines issued by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority, for the accident taken place in the year 2017 the notional income of the deceased has to be taken at Rs. 11,000/-p.m. Therefore, the monthly income of the deceased can be assessed Rs. 10,000/-. Claimant No. 1 is the wife, aged about 70 years, claimant No. 2 is the married daughter, claimant No. 3 and 4 are the major sons of the deceased and they have their own source of income. Considering the same, the Tribunal has rightly deducted 50% of the income of the deceased towards 'personal expenses'. Thus the monthly income of the deceased comes to Rs. 5,000/-. The deceased was aged about 80 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. 3,00,000/-(Rs. 5,000*12*5) on account of 'loss of dependency'. In addition, the claimants are entitled to compensation of Rs. 15,000/-on account of 'loss of estate' and compensation of Rs. 15,000/-on account of 'funeral expenses'. In view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of 'MAGMA GENERAL INSURANCE' (supra), claimant No. 1, wife of the deceased is entitled for compensation of Rs. 40,000/-under the head of 'loss of spousal consortium', claimant Nos. 2 to 4, children of the deceased are entitled for compensation of Rs. 40,000/-each under the head of 'loss of parental consortium'. 10. Thus, the claimants are entitled to the following compensation: Compensation under different Heads Amount in (Rs.) Loss of dependency 3,00,000 Funeral expenses 15,000 Loss of estate 15,000 Loss of spousal consortium 40,000 Loss of Parental consortium 1,20,000 Total 4,90,000 11. 40,000/-each under the head of 'loss of parental consortium'. 10. Thus, the claimants are entitled to the following compensation: Compensation under different Heads Amount in (Rs.) Loss of dependency 3,00,000 Funeral expenses 15,000 Loss of estate 15,000 Loss of spousal consortium 40,000 Loss of Parental consortium 1,20,000 Total 4,90,000 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. 4,90,000/-as against Rs. 2,50,000/-awarded by the Tribunal. In view of judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of 'MS.JOYEETA BOSE', the enhanced compensation shall carry interest at 6% per annum. The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the compensation amount along with interest at 8% p.a. (the enhanced compensation shall carry interest at 6% per annum) 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. In view of the order dated 21.04.2022 passed by this Court, the claimants are not entitled for interest for the delayed period of 420 days in filing the appeal.