JUDGMENT : (SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN, J.) This appeal has been filed by the claimants in OP(MV) No.153 of 2004 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Punalur. The respondents herein were the respondents before the tribunal. 2. The case of the appellants/claimants is that on 29.01.2004, while the deceased was standing on the backside of a lorry, another lorry bearing Reg.No.KL-7-M-7506 driven by the second respondent in a rash and negligent manner, hit him, whereby he sustained grievous injuries and succumbed to the injuries. The claimants, being the legal heirs of the deceased, approached the tribunal claiming a total compensation of Rs.10,00,000/-. 3. Party respondents remained ex parte before the tribunal. The third respondent insurer filed a written statement, admitting the policy coverage for the offending vehicle, but disputing the liability and quantum of compensation claimed. Before the tribunal, PWs 1 & 2 were examined and Exts.A1 to A12 were marked on the side of the appellants/claimants. No evidence was adduced by the respondents. The tribunal, after analysing the pleadings and materials on record, held that the accident took place on account of the negligence of the driver of the offending vehicle and awarded a sum of Rs.5,21,000/- as compensation under different heads against the third respondent being the insurer. Dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the tribunal, the claimants have come up in appeal. 4. I have heard the learned counsel for the appellants and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent insurer. 5. The learned counsel for the appellants claims enhancement under the following heads: 5.1. Notional income - The learned counsel for the appellants submits that the deceased was working as driver-cum- manager and he was earning Rs.10,000/- per month, however, the tribunal has fixed the notional monthly income only at Rs.3,500/-, which is on the lower side. Per contra, the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent insurer submits that the income notionally fixed by the tribunal is just and proper. The appellants produced Ext.A9 driving licence and Ext.A12 salary certificate of the deceased to show that he was having heavy goods and heavy passenger driving licence with badge and he was working as driver of lorry since June, 2002, and was drawing Rs.500/- per day. In order to prove Ext.A12 salary certificate, PW2/employer was examined, who deposed that the deceased was drawing Rs.500/- per day. In order to prove Ext.A12 salary certificate, PW2/employer was examined, who deposed that the deceased was drawing Rs.500/- per day. Being a lorry driver, it can be presumed that he would have worked for at least 20 days in a month. Hence, I find it appropriate to refix the notional monthly income of the deceased at Rs.10,000/-. 5.2. Loss of dependency - Since the monthly income of the deceased is refixed at Rs.10,000/-, compensation towards loss of dependency has to be recalculated. The deceased was 27 years old at the time of the accident. Thus, after adding 40% of the notional income towards future prospects, the amount would be arrived at Rs.14,000/- (10000 + 4000). Accordingly, following the judgments in National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi [ 2017(4) KLT 662 (SC)] and Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transport Corporation [ 2010(2) KLT 802 (SC)], the appellants will be entitled to get a total compensation of Rs.19,04,000/- (14000 x 12 x 17 x 2/3) towards loss of dependency. Hence, there will be an additional amount of Rs.14,28,000/- under this head. 5.3. Loss of consortium/loss of love & affection - On a perusal of the award, it is seen that the tribunal awarded Rs.10,000/- as compensation towards loss of consortium and Rs.20,000/- towards loss of love & affection. However, the tribunal was wrong in awarding compensation of Rs.20,000/- towards loss of love and affection, which is impermissible and runs against the mandate in Pranay Sethi (supra). Therefore, the compensation awarded by the tribunal towards loss of love and affection is deleted. Since there are three legal heirs, the appellants are entitled to get an amount of Rs.1,20,000/- towards loss of consortium. Thus, there will be an additional compensation of Rs.1,10,000/- towards loss of consortium. 5.4. Loss of estate - The tribunal has not awarded any compensation towards loss of estate. Following the judgment in Pranay Sethi (supra), I deem it appropriate to award to the appellants a total compensation of Rs.15,000/- under this head. Thus, the appellants will be entitled to get a compensation of Rs.15,000/- towards loss of estate. 5.5. Funeral expenses - On a perusal of the award, it is seen that the tribunal awarded only an amount of Rs.3,000/- towards funeral expenses. However, going by the judgment in Pranay Sethi (supra), the tribunal ought to have granted Rs.15,000/- towards funeral expenses. Thus, the appellants will be entitled to get a compensation of Rs.15,000/- towards loss of estate. 5.5. Funeral expenses - On a perusal of the award, it is seen that the tribunal awarded only an amount of Rs.3,000/- towards funeral expenses. However, going by the judgment in Pranay Sethi (supra), the tribunal ought to have granted Rs.15,000/- towards funeral expenses. Thus, the appellants will be entitled to get an additional compensation of Rs.12,000/- under this head. 6. Though the appellants claimed enhancement of compensation under other heads as well, on a perusal of the records available and the impugned award, I am not inclined to interfere with the same since it appears to be just and reasonable. Thus, the impugned award of the tribunal is modified as follows: Sl. No. Head of Claim Amount awarded by the tribunal (in )Rs. Modified in appeal (in )Rs. Total compensation (in )Rs. 1. Loss of dependency 476000 1428000 1904000 2. Transport to hospital 2000 2000 3. Funeral expenses 3000 12000 15000 4. Pain & suffering 10000 10000 5. Loss of estate 15000 15000 6. Loss of consortium 10000 110000 120000 7. Loss of love and affection 20000 -20000 deleted Total 521000 1545000 2066000 Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in part and the appellants are awarded an additional compensation of Rs.15,45,000/- (Rupees fifteen lakh and forty five thousand only) over and above the compensation awarded by the tribunal with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of petition till realization and proportionate costs. The respondent insurer shall deposit the said amount together with interest and costs within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. The appellants shall furnish copies of the PAN Card, AADHAAR Card and bank details before the respondent insurer within a period of one month so as to enable the insurance company to make the deposit as ordered above. In case of failure to furnish details as above, it shall be open for the insurance company to deposit the said amount before the tribunal. Upon such deposit being made, the entire amount shall be disbursed to the appellants at the earliest in accordance with law. However, it is made clear that the enhanced compensation will not carry interest for the period of delay of 3546 days in filing the appeal.