JUDGMENT : S.G. PANDIT, J. 1. The claimants/parents of the deceased are before this Court, not being satisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded under the judgment and award dated 10.01.2025 in MVC No. 284/2024 on the file of the VIII Additional Judge and Court of Small Causes and Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bengaluru (for short “the Tribunal” ) and praying for enhancement of compensation. 2. The brief facts of the case are that: The parents of the deceased filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1989, claiming compensation for the death of their son B.R. Manoj Gowda in a road traffic accident that occurred on 11.12.2023 involving motor cycle bearing registration No.KA-51-HU-4097 and a lorry bearing registration No.KA-53-D-4720. It is stated that the deceased was aged about 18 years as on the date of accident and he was earning a sum of Rs.30,000/- p.m. by running a Cyber Center at Attibele. 3. On issuance of notice, the respondent-Insurance Company appeared before the Tribunal and filed their written statement, denying the claim petition averments. Further, the respondent-Insurance Company stated that the alleged accident occurred solely due to negligence on the part of the deceased himself and deceased was riding the vehicle without wearing helmet as on the date of accident. The second respondent also filed its written statement stating that the Policy issued by the first respondent was in force and it was also stated that the driver of the offending Lorry was not possessing valid and effective Driving Licence as on the date of accident. 4. Before the Tribunal, the second claimant, father of the deceased got examined himself as P.W.1 apart from marking the documents as Ex.P1 to Ex.P9. On the other hand, the respondents have not adduced any evidence in support of their contention. 5. The Tribunal, on appreciating the material on record, awarded total compensation of Rs.23,75,800/- under the following heads, along with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of petition till its realization: S. No. Head of Compensation Amount 1. Loss of Dependency 23,05,800-00 2. Loss of filial consortium (Rs.20,000/- each to Petitioner No.1 and 2) 40,000-00 3. Loss of Estate 15,000-00 4 Funeral Expenses 15,000-00 Total 23,75,800-00 The claimants not being satisfied with the quantum of compensation are before this Court in this appeal. 6. Loss of Dependency 23,05,800-00 2. Loss of filial consortium (Rs.20,000/- each to Petitioner No.1 and 2) 40,000-00 3. Loss of Estate 15,000-00 4 Funeral Expenses 15,000-00 Total 23,75,800-00 The claimants not being satisfied with the quantum of compensation are before this Court in this appeal. 6. Heard learned counsel Sri.Chandrashekar Swamy K.B., for appellants and Sri.D.Vijaya Kumar, learned counsel for respondent No.1. Perused the entire appeal papers. 7. The claimants are before this Court claiming enhancement of compensation. It is specifically stated that the Tribunal committed an error in assessing the income of the deceased at Rs.15,250/- p.m. It is stated that the income in terms of the notional income chart prepared by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority for the year 2023 would be Rs.16,000/- p.m. As such the income assessed for the accident of the year 2023 at Rs.15,250/- p.m. is on the lower side and it is prayed to assess the income of the deceased at Rs.16,000/- p.m. Further, it is contended that consortium awarded by the Tribunal at Rs.20,000/- each is on the lower side. It is submitted that, in terms of the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Magma General Insurance Company Limited vs. Nanu Ram Alias Chuhru Ram and Others , (2018) 18 SCC 130 the claimants would be entitled for consortium of Rs.40,000/- each. Thus, it is prayed for enhancement of compensation on the head loss of consortium. 8. Per contra, learned counsel Sri.D.Vijaya Kumar, appearing for respondent-Insurance Company would submit that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable and no interference is warranted by this Court. 9. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the entire appeal papers, the only point which falls for our consideration is as to whether the claimants/appellants would be entitled for enhancement of compensation? 10. The answer to the above point would be in the affirmative for the following reasons: The accident that occurred on 11.12.2023 involving motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-51-HU-4097 and Lorry bearing registration No.KA-53-D-4720 and the accidental death of son of the claimants B.R. Manoj Gowda is not in dispute in this appeal. The claimants are parents of the deceased and they are in appeal praying for enhancement of compensation. The claimants state that the deceased was earning a sum of Rs.30,000/- p.m. by running a Cyber Center. 11. The accident is of the year 2023. The claimants are parents of the deceased and they are in appeal praying for enhancement of compensation. The claimants state that the deceased was earning a sum of Rs.30,000/- p.m. by running a Cyber Center. 11. The accident is of the year 2023. The income of the deceased assessed by the Tribunal at Rs.15,250/- p.m., is on the lower side. Normally, this Court taking note of the notional income chart prepared by the Legal Services Authority would assess the notional income of the deceased who fail to prove the income by producing cogent material. In the instant case, no material is placed on record to establish that the deceased was earning Rs.30,000/- p.m. In the absence of any material to establish the income of the deceased, this Court would assess the notional income of the deceased at Rs.16,000/- p.m., in terms of the notional income chart prepared by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority and accordingly, the income of the deceased is reassessed at Rs.16,000/- p.m. 12. Further, the claimants who are parents of the deceased would be entitled for filial consortium of Rs.40,000/- each in terms of the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Magma General Insurance Company (supra). 13. The deceased is aged about 18 years as on the date of accident. The Tribunal has rightly awarded compensation on the head of future prospects, taking note of the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in National Insurance Company Limited vs. Pranay Sethi and Others , (2017) 16 SCC 680 at 40% of the assessed income. Since the deceased is a bachelor, deduction towards personal expenses would be 50%. Taking into consideration the age of the deceased, the appropriate multiplier adopted is 18. Thus, claimants would be entitled for modified compensation as under: S. No. Head of Compensation Amount 1. Loss of Dependency including future prospects: 16,000 x 12 x 18 = 34,56,000 + 40% - 50% = Rs.24,19,200/- 2. Loss of filial consortium (Rs.40,000/- each to Petitioner No.1 and 2) 80,000-00 3. Loss of Estate 15,000-00 4 Funeral Expenses 15,000-00 Total 25,29,200-00 The claimants would be entitled for total compensation of Rs.25,29,200/- with interest at the rate of 6% p.m. from the date of petition till realization. 14. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in part . Loss of filial consortium (Rs.40,000/- each to Petitioner No.1 and 2) 80,000-00 3. Loss of Estate 15,000-00 4 Funeral Expenses 15,000-00 Total 25,29,200-00 The claimants would be entitled for total compensation of Rs.25,29,200/- with interest at the rate of 6% p.m. from the date of petition till realization. 14. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in part . The judgment and award dated 10.01.2025 passed in MVC No.284/2024 by the VIII Additional Judge and Court of Small Causes & ACJM, Bengaluru is modified to the above extent. The claimants would be entitled for total compensation of Rs.25,29,200/- thereby they are entitled for enhanced compensation of Rs.1,53,400/- with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of petition till realization. The apportionment and deposit would be in the proportion as ordered by the Tribunal.