JUDGMENT : The present civil misc. appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 has been preferred by the appellants against the judgment and award dated 27.7.2012 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Pali in Claim Case No.152/2009 whereby the learned tribunal partly allowed the claim petition and awarded compensation to the claimants-appellants a sum of Rs.2,27,300/-. 2. Dissatisfied with the award amount, the present civil misc. appeal has been preferred. Arguing on the appeal, learned counsel for the appellants submits that in the present case, at the time of accident, the deceased Virma Ram 19 years’ old. However, the learned tribunal while assessing the monthly income of the deceased has awarded a meagre amount of Rs. 2 lacs. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the learned tribunal failed to take into consideration the future prospects of the deceased and if the same was taken into consideration, then the whole amount as claimed by the appellants would have been awarded. Further, it is submitted that towards the heads of damages, mental agony, loss of love and affection and funeral expenses, not a single penny was awarded to the appellants-claimants. 3. Learned counsel for the appellants relying upon the judgment of the Madras High Court delivered in the case of Stalin & Anr. Vs. S. Baskaran (CMA No.4422/2019), decided on 17.3.2021 submits that in death case of a boy of 14 years, the Hon’ble Madras High Court awarded total compensation to the tune of Rs.6,75,000/- to the claimants. 4. Learned counsel further while relying upon the judgment of this Court delivered in the case of Smt. Mamta & Anr. Vs. Mahendra Singh & Ors. (SBCMA No.2648/2015), decided on 23.2.2022 submits that in that case too, this Court awarded a sum of Rs.7,85,000/-to the claimants-appellant because in the said case too, a boy aged about 8 years died in an accident. 5. Learned counsel also relied upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Kishan Gopal & Anr. Vs. Lala & Ors (Civil Appeal No.7173/2013), decided on 26.8.2013, wherein too, the Hon’ble Apex Court awarded a sum of Rs.5 lacs to the claimants as their son aged about 10 years has been expired in an accident. 6. 5. Learned counsel also relied upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Kishan Gopal & Anr. Vs. Lala & Ors (Civil Appeal No.7173/2013), decided on 26.8.2013, wherein too, the Hon’ble Apex Court awarded a sum of Rs.5 lacs to the claimants as their son aged about 10 years has been expired in an accident. 6. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that in view of the above, it is clear that the learned tribunal has awarded a meagre amount of compensation to the claimants-appellants and, therefore, the same deserves to be enhanced suitably. 7. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the respondents opposed the prayer made by the learned counsel for the appellants and submits that the learned tribunal has rightly passed the impugned award and the same does not warrant any interference. 8. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 9. In Kishan Gopal & Anr. Vs. Lal & Ors reported in (2014) 1 SCC 244 , the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that even in case of death of a child having no income, the notional income should be taken as multiplicand and it should be multiplied with proper multiplier. The Hon’ble Supreme Court also took into note that in the Second Schedule to Section 163 A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, there is provision for “notional income” for compensation to those who had no income prior to the accident. In the Schedule, the notional income was Rs.15,000/- per annum. 10. In the case of Lata Wadhwa v. State of Bihar reported in (2001) 8 SCC 197 , considering the dwindling value of money, the Hon’ble Supreme Court applied enhanced notional income of Rs.24,000/- per annum. 11. While considering the adoption of just notional income, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in para 38 of Kishan Gopal’s case observed as follows :- “38. In our considered view, the aforesaid legal principle laid down in Lata Wadhwa’s case with all fours is applicable to the facts and circumstances of the case in hand having regard to the fact that the deceased was 10 years’ old, who was assisting the Appellants in their agricultural occupation which is an undisputed fact. In our considered view, the aforesaid legal principle laid down in Lata Wadhwa’s case with all fours is applicable to the facts and circumstances of the case in hand having regard to the fact that the deceased was 10 years’ old, who was assisting the Appellants in their agricultural occupation which is an undisputed fact. We have also considered the fact that the rupee value has come down drastically from the year 1994, when the notional income of the non-earning member prior to the date of accident was fixed at Rs. 15,000/-. Further, the deceased boy, had he been alive would have certainly contributed substantially to the family of the Appellants by working hard.” 12. Thus, one of the important consideration while deciding notional income was that the value of rupee had come down drastically in last few decades. In Kishan Gopal’s case, the accident had taken place in 1992 and the case of Kishan Gopal was decided by the Hon’ble Supreme Court on 26.08.2013 and multiplicand of Rs.30,000/- per annum was allowed. 13. In Kurvan Ansari alias Kurvan Ali & Anr. v. Shyam Kishore Murmu & Anr. reported in 2022 (1) RAR 17 (SC), the Hon’ble Supreme Court relied upon Kishan Gopal’s case and applied multiplier method for deciding ‘just compensation’ for death of a child aged about seven years. 14. In Smt. Mamta & Anr. Vs. Mahendra, the multiplicand was further enhanced to Rs.45,000/-in the background of prevailing socio-economic scenario. 15. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I deem it appropriate to apply the multiplicand of Rs.45,000/-per annum. Further considering the legal principles laid down in Sarla Verma’s case which was approved in National Insurance Company Limited v. Pranay Sethi and Ors. reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680 , proper multiplier would be of 15. Thus, the loss of dependency as calculated is Rs.06,75,000/-. Besides the aforesaid, the claimants (parents of the victim of accident) are separately entitled for Rs.40,000/-for loss of filial consortium and Rs.15,000/- under conventional head of funeral expenses. 16. Thus, the total payable compensation as calculated is Rs.7,85,000/-. This amount would be payable minus already paid amount along with interest of 6% as ordered by the Tribunal from the date of application within two months. In default of payment within the time aforesaid, 12% interest would be chargeable from the date of death till realization. 16. Thus, the total payable compensation as calculated is Rs.7,85,000/-. This amount would be payable minus already paid amount along with interest of 6% as ordered by the Tribunal from the date of application within two months. In default of payment within the time aforesaid, 12% interest would be chargeable from the date of death till realization. Other findings and directions of the Tribunal are affirmed. 17. The appeal stands allowed to the aforesaid extent.