JUDGMENT : GITA GOPI, J. 1. The claimants have challenged the judgment and award dated 9.9.2022 passed in MACP no. 49/15 by the MACT (Aux), Bharuch. The ground raised to challenge the judgment and award inter-alia is to the effect that the income of the deceased ought to have been considered as per the Consumer Price Index and Cost Inflation Index of the year 2015. 2. Advocate Mr. Bhalodi for the appellants submits that the deceased was agricultural labourer and if he is to be considered as unskilled person then as per the date of the accident of 22.1.2015, relying upon the minimum wages schedule, his income ought to have been assessed at Rs. 6,968/-. 3. Mr. Nanavati submitted that the learned Tribunal has considered Rs. 5,000/- as income since no cogent documentary evidence was produced on record to prove the fact that the deceased was engaged in agricultural activities and thus, submitted that the compensation granted is just and proper. 4. The facts state that on 22.1.2015 at about 12.30 p.m. the deceased was standing on the road side along with the motorcycle bearing registration no. GJ-16 AJ-7395 and at that time, one tractor bearing registration no. GJ-16 BG-1043 came in an uncontrollable speed dashed with the deceased who sustained injuries and died in the road accident. 5. At the time of the accident, he was 47 years of age. The fact on the record which could be proved by way of oral evidence was that the deceased was agricultural labourer and was maintaining the family and hence, regarding the wages to be paid and as the agricultural labourer fall under the category of unskilled labourer, Rs. 6,968/- is assessed as monthly income. The Tribunal has granted 25% rise as prospective rise. Thus, the monthly income could be considered as Rs. 6,968/- + 25% = Rs. 8,710/-. One-third amount is to be deducted as personal expenses. Since the dependents were two in number, Rs. 2,903/- is deducted and therefore, the monthly dependency would come to Rs. 5,807/- and annually Rs. 69,684/- applying multiplier of 13, future loss would come to Rs. 9,05,892/-. 6. The consortium loss has been granted by the Tribunal to the widow including the funeral expenses and loss to estate of Rs. 16,500/- under each head. 7. The computation of the compensation would be as under: Dependency loss Rs. 9,05,882/- Funeral expenses Rs. 5,807/- and annually Rs. 69,684/- applying multiplier of 13, future loss would come to Rs. 9,05,892/-. 6. The consortium loss has been granted by the Tribunal to the widow including the funeral expenses and loss to estate of Rs. 16,500/- under each head. 7. The computation of the compensation would be as under: Dependency loss Rs. 9,05,882/- Funeral expenses Rs. 16,500/- Loss to estate Rs. 16,500/- Consortium loss Rs. 44,000/- Total compensation Rs. 9,82,892/- 8. 10% contributory negligence has been assessed by the Tribunal. Thus, Rs. 98,289/- would be deducted and the compensation thus as could be granted to the claimants would be Rs. 8,84,603/-. 9. As the Tribunal has granted compensation of Rs.6,54,300/- with interest at the rate of 9% per annum, the claimants would be entitled to the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.2,30,303/- with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till its realization. The insurance Company is directed to deposit the said amount within eight weeks from the date of receipt of writ of this Court. 10. The impugned judgment and award be modified accordingly. The appeal is partly allowed. Registry is directed to send the record and proceedings back to the Tribunal, if received.