not produced before the Court apart from that PW2 was examined and he says that he was paying salary of Rs.6,000/excluding food and not stated that he was paying Rs.400/- when he used to drive the vehicle. First of all, in order to prove that the deceased was a driver, no material is placed before the Court either DL or any other document. When there is a admission that the salary was Rs.6,000/- per month, again they cannot contend that the notional income of Rs.7,000/- has to be considered. Hence, I do not find any force in the contention of the claimant counsel that this Court has to take notional income. However, the Tribunal has committed an error in taking the future prospectus at 30% since the deceased was aged about 26 years at the time of the accident as per PM report hence, future prospectus of 40% has to be added to the income of Rs.6,000/-. If 40% is added to Rs.6,000/-, it comes to Rs.8,400/- (6,000 x 40%) and the claimants are the wife, son and mother of the deceased hence, 1/3rd has to be deducted towards personal expenses and the relevant multiplier is 17, hence the compensation towards loss of dependency comes to Rs.11,42,400/- (5,600 x 12 x 17). The claimants are entitled for the amount of Rs.40,000/- each towards loss of love and
