In my opinion the Tribunal has erred in completely disregarding the fact that even if the deceased was not proved to have owned any land he was at least proved to have been an agriculturist. Consequently his income as an agriculturist labour had to be taken. As per the relevant notification the agricultural income for the year 1994 was to the tune of Rs. 1600/- per month. Since there were seven th has to be made and dependants excluding the father, deduction of 1/5 the dependency would, therefore, be Rs. 3360/- per month (80% of Rs.4200/-) i.e. Rs. 40320/- per annum. The age of he deceased was 52 years and has per Sarla Verma v. DTC , (2001) 6 SCC 121 the multiplier would be 11 as against 9 which has been granted by the Tribunal. Compensation thus amounts to Rs. 4,43,520/-. Learned counsel has further argued that only Rs. 5000/- have been given as loss of consortium to the widow-appellant No.1. In my opinion it would be appropriate to grant Rs. 45,000/- more as loss of consortium and Rs. 50,000/- as loss of love and affection. It has come in the award of the Tribunal that at the time of the accident all the claimants were major except appellant No.6. In the circumstances I award Rs. 50,000/- each to appellants No. 2, 3 and 4 (daughters), appellant No.6(minor son) and appellant No.7(mother) for loss of love and affection and an amount of Rs. 25,000/- to the appellant No.5, major son, for loss of love and affection. I award further amount of Rs. 5000/- for funeral expenses. The amount paid would be set off against the enhancement and the enhanced amount would carry interest at the rate of 8% p.a. from the
