Sreedhar Rao, J.

One Rajji Mathews, was an inmate of the Maruthi car. The lorry belonging to the fourth respondent hit against the car resulting in the death of Rajji Mathews. The deceased was aged about 33 years. It is said that the deceased was managing director of a company dealing in real estate development. The wife and the parents of the deceased had filed claim petition seeking compensation.

2. The Tribunal has awarded the compensation to the petitioners and directed the insurer to pay the compensation. The insurer is in appeal. It is the contention of the insurer that the wife of the deceased is remarried and she is not entitled to claim compensation for loss of dependency. The widow after remarriage would be only entitled a global compensation. The decision of this Court in the case of Smt Manorama Alias Monica Vs V. Mohammad And Others, ILR 2006 Kar 3929 is relied on.

3. The concept of dependency while awarding compensation is a notional concept. The fact of actual dependency need not be proved in law if one is legally a dependant. It cannot be legally assumed that the remarriage always benefits to the financially and that the loss of dependency would get fully neutralised. The remarriage of a widow is a not a disqualification for inheritance of the estate. The widow by remarriage if not for dependency would be entitled to seek compensation for loss of estate. The ratio laid down in ILR. 2006 Kar. 3939 that widow by remarriage would be entitled to only global compensation would not be a correct proposition of law. That apart in this case, the parents of the deceased are also the petitioners and are entitled to seek compensation for loss of dependency.

4. The claimants have not produced any credible material to show the volume of business of the company, the lands acquired for the development and the income tax assessment particulars. In the absence of income proof, it is just and reasonable to hold that the income of the deceased is Rs. 3000 P.m. As per the unit system, ¼ is to be deduced towards personal expenses. Rs.2250 would enure to the benefits of the dependants. The total loss of dependency would be Rs. 4,05,000/- (Rs.2250x12x15). The widow is entitled for Rs.25,000 towards loss of consortium, the petitioners together entitled for Rs.25,000 towards loss of expectancy, and Rs. 10,000 towards funeral expenses. In all the petitioners are entitled for a total compensation of Rs.4,65,000/- as against Rs. 6,09,940/- awarded by the Tribunal. The appeal is allowed in part.