JUDGMENT : GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J. 1. The claimants have preferred this appeal for enhancement of compensation awarded under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicle Act for the death of Moshin Khan @ Lalu in a motor vehicle accident. 2. The learned Tribunal recorded a finding of fact that the deceased died in a motor vehicle accident involving a truck bearing registration no. WB 41D 2485 when he was in the process of repairing the mechanical fault in Innova Car bearing registration no.DL 04 CAE 6342 on 16.07.2011, and he was working under the said car when the accident took place. 3. The factum of accident has not been challenged and the appeal is confined to the quantum of compensation. 4. It is argued by the learned counsel on behalf of appellant that the deceased was a motor mechanic with a monthly income of Rs.9000/- per month at the time of accident and the witnesses examined on behalf of claimant have specifically stated that the deceased was having monthly income of Rs.9000/- which remained uncontroverted in the cross- examination. It is contended that without assigning any reason, the learned Tribunal has assessed the monthly income of the deceased to be Rs.4000/- and not Rs.9000/-. Further, a meagre sum of Rs.10,000/- has only been awarded under conventional head which is not as per the ratio laid by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of National Insurance Company Ltd. vs. Pranay Sethi , reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680 . 5. Mr. Bibhash Sinha, learned counsel on behalf of Insurance Company submitted that learned Tribunal has specifically stated that no cogent oral evidence was adduced in support of the income, and there was no documentary evidence regarding it therefore, considering the occupation of the deceased, Rs.4000/- has been accepted for computing compensation amount. 6. Having considered the submission advanced on behalf of both sides, there is merit for enhancement of compensation as income of the deceased is taken only Rs.4000/- per month although witnesses have deposed that he was earning Rs.9000/- per month. It is not in dispute that the deceased was a motor mechanic and the accident took place when he was involved in the repair work. Considering the year when the accident took place in 2011 therefore, rough estimate of Rs.6000/- per month can be taken as monthly income of the deceased. It is not in dispute that the deceased was a motor mechanic and the accident took place when he was involved in the repair work. Considering the year when the accident took place in 2011 therefore, rough estimate of Rs.6000/- per month can be taken as monthly income of the deceased. The deceased was 25 years of age and was unmarried at the time of accident and therefore, his personal and living expenses will be 50% and multiplier of 18 shall be applicable. The claimants will also be entitled to loss of income under the head of future prospect to be 40%. Under the circumstance, the final compensation amount shall work out as under: - Annual Income Rs.6000 x 12 = Rs.72,000/- Annual dependency after deducting 50% on the living and personal expenses of the deceased Rs.72000/2=Rs.36,000/- Loss of dependency on taking a multiplier of 18 Rs.6,48,000/- Future prospect @ 40% Rs. 2,59,200/- Conventional head Rs.84,000/- Total Rs.9,91,200/- 7. Thus, the claimants shall be entitled to compensation for a sum o Rs.9,91,200/- with interest of 6% from the time of filing of claim application. Insurance Company shall make the payment to the Tribunal within a month of this order, which shall be disbursed forthwith to the claimants as per the terms fixed by it. Miscellaneous Appeal is accordingly, allowed. Interlocutory Application, if any, is disposed of. It goes without saying that the amount already paid shall be deducted from final compensation amount.