Hon'ble RAFIQ, J.—Two fold arguments raised by the learned counsel for the appellants while assailing the award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jaipur dated 12/7/2004 and seeking enhancement of compensation are firstly that salary certificate of deceased Laddu Ram @Laddu Gopal dated 16/2/2001 was proved that he was working as Sanitary Supervisor in Hari Pipe & Sanitarywares and was being paid Rs.5,000/- per month. The Proprietor of the said firm Shri Hari Singh Verma appeared as witnesses AW2 and has proved this certificate and also the fact that he was working with him and that he was being paid Rs.5,000/- per month. Learned counsel for the appellants further placed reliance on the statement of widow Smt.Dhanni Devi AW1 to substantiate his argument that the deceased was earning Rs.5,000/- per month. His second argument is that there are four dependents and 1/4th should have been deducted towards the own expenses of the deceased as per the judgment of Supreme Court in Sarla Verma & Others vs. Delhi Transport Corporation & Another : (2009) 6 SCC 121 = 2009(1) CCR 276 (SC) = 2009(4) RLW 2785 (SC), whereas learned Tribunal has wrongly deducted 1/3rd. 2. Learned counsel for the respondents has opposed the appeal and argued that the widow in her statement has stated that the deceased was working for last ten years, whereas owner of the said firm Shri Hari Singh Verma has stated that he was working with him since 1/10/2000 and in cross-examination, the said witness has stated that he has not brought with him the bill or vouchers etc. nor produced them. Learned counsel therefore submitted that the evidence of this witness cannot be accepted on its face value. 3. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the award as well as the record, I find that in so far as finding of the learned Tribunal in accepting income of the deceased to be of Rs.3,000/- is concerned, it does not call for any interference however, in view of the fact that there are four dependents, 1/4th should have been deducted for the own expenses of the deceased and hence deduction of 1/3rd may not be justified in view of the judgment of Supreme Court in Sarla Verma. 4. In the result, the appeal is allowed in part. 4. In the result, the appeal is allowed in part. The award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jaipur dated 12/7/2004 is modified in the following terms:- (a) Rs.3,000/- p.m. accepted income. (b) Rs.2250/- (1/4th deduction) 3000-750 (c) 2250x12x18 = 4,86,000/- (d) Award of Rs.5,000/- for 'loss of consortium', Rs.15,000/- for 'love & affection', Rs.10,000/- for 'future care to parents' and Rs.2,000/- for 'funeral expenses' is maintained. (e) 4,86,000/- + Rs.32,000/- = Rs.5,18,000/-. 5. The compensation of Rs.4,64,000/- is thus enhanced to Rs.5,18,000/-. The appellants shall be entitled to interest @7.5% on the enhanced amount of compensation from the date of filing claim petition. Record, be transmitted to the Tribunal forthwith.