ORDER : 1. Leave granted. 2. This appeal is directed against the final order dated 12th July 2022 passed by the High Court of Orissa at Cuttack whereby the High Court in MACA No. 36 of 2022, on appeal from the judgment and Order dated 28th October 2021 entered by the Learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-III Bhadrak, reduced to Rs. 15,00,000/-, the compensation as awarded by the latter, which was to the tune of Rs. 21,70,000/-. 3. The claimant-appellants herein are the wife and children of one Kishore Sahu who, at the age of 44, met an untimely end on 5th January, 2016 upon collision of his truck bearing registration number OR-01A-5175, with a truck bearing registration number OR-22-4023. The learned MACT found that the accident was a result of rashness and negligence on the part of the driver of truck number OR-22-4023. 4. Having considered the testimonies and evidence on record, the learned Tribunal passed an award which can be summarized thus:- "9. The learned counsel for the petitioner during the course of argument put forth that since the deceased had a fixed wage, the petitioner is entitled to the benefit of future prospect and also entitled to the to get loss of consortium, loss of love and affection and other benefits as per their entitlement. On this backdrop, reliance can be placed in the case of National Insurance Company Limited (Supra) whereon the Hon'ble Apex Court held that future prospect is applicable to self-employed or on a fixed salary and also determined the percentage in relation to different age groups. Hence, considering the above aspects, the compensation amount is computed below:- i) Monthly income: Rs.15,000/- ii) 25% of (i) above to be added as future prospect: Rs.15,000/- + Rs.3750/- = Rs.18,750/- iii) 1/3 of (ii) deducted as personal expenses of the deceased: Rs.18,750/- - Rs.6,250/- = Rs.12,500/- iv) Compensation after multiplier 14 is applied Rs.12,500 x 12 x 14 = Rs.21,00,000/- v) Funeral expenses: Rs. 15,000/- vi) Loss of consortium: Rs.40,000/- vii) Loss of estate : Rs.15,000/-Total: Rs.21,70,000/- (Rupees twenty one lakh seventy thousand only)" 5. The respondent herein (insurer)carried the matter in appeal to the High Court. It was found that no document had been exhibited to prove the income of the deceased. Therefore, it was observed that minimum wages had to be applied to him and so Rs.15,000/- could not be taken as his income. The respondent herein (insurer)carried the matter in appeal to the High Court. It was found that no document had been exhibited to prove the income of the deceased. Therefore, it was observed that minimum wages had to be applied to him and so Rs.15,000/- could not be taken as his income. This appears to be the only reason given in the impugned judgment for ordering a reduction of compensation to Rs.15,00,000/- with 6% interest. The respondent Company was directed to deposit the amount within 8 weeks. It was further stipulated that should the period granted to deposit the amount expire, the interest shall be enhanced to 7% from the date of expiry of 8 weeks till the date of payment. 6. We are of the view that the High Court erred in ordering reduction of compensation. A perusal of the order of the Tribunal shows that the figure of Rs.15,000/- had been arrived at after due consideration. Relevant extract of the order is as under: "8. As regards the earning of the deceased, P.W.1 has stated that he deceased husband was earning Rs.15,000/- per month as he was having a grocery shop named and style as "Tarini Store" at Kendupada Bazaar and also owner of the trekker bearing registration No.OR-01-A-5175 which was seized by the I.O. during investigation and was maintaining his family members. PWs 2, 3, 4 and 5 who are co-villagers and neighbouring villagers of the deceased clearly and categorically stated that the deceased was running grocery shop at the Kendupada bazaar. Further, Ext.3/1 the seizure list dtd. 22.3.2016 shows that during course of investigation the I.O. has seized the RC book of the trekker bearing No. OR-01-A-5175 which clearly reveals that the deceased was the owner of the above trekker and after seizure was made, the I.O let the trekker in the zima of the petitioner no.1. No contra evidence was adduced by the O.P. No.2 to prove that the deceased was having no income, Therefore, it is held that in the fact and circumstance of the case the income of the deceased per day was not less than Rs.500/- and her monthly income was (Rs.500 x 30 days) = Rs.15,000/-." 7. Such a finding was arrived at by the Tribunal after due consideration of the evidence on record. Such a finding was arrived at by the Tribunal after due consideration of the evidence on record. The High Court ought not to have interfered with the said finding and that too in such a cursory manner. Merely observing that no documentary evidence stood adduced cannot be termed to be sufficient, in the facts of this case to ignore the testimony of the witnesses as discussed in the quote above. 8. In our view the compensation arrived at by the Tribunal is fair, just and reasonable and hence the same is restored. The judgment of the High Court with the particulars as mentioned in paragraph one is set aside. The appeal is allowed in the above terms. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.