RAFIQ, J.—Both these appeals have been preferred against award dated 18.08.2007 of learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal and Additional District & Sessions Judge, Fast Track No.3, Jaipur District, Jaipur, in MAC Case No.274/2007 (453/2006). Non-claimant the New India Assurance Company Limited has filed the appeal for quashment of the award and that it may be absolved of liability to pay compensation. Claimants have preferred the appeal for enhancement of amount of compensation. Since both appeals arise out of same award, they are being decided by this common judgment. 2. Contention of learned counsel for non-claimant the New India Assurance Company Limited is that learned Tribunal has wrongly decided issue no.3 pertaining to quantum of compensation. Learned Tribunal erred in considering 25% additional income of deceased than proved. It is mandatory to assess the loss of income on the basis of net income proved by claimants. He further contended that learned Tribunal has erred in adopting multiplier towards higher side. Learned counsel argued that statutory provisions clearly indicate that compensation must be “just and reasonable” and it cannot be a bonanza; not a source of profit but same should not be a pittance. 3. On the contrary, contention of learned counsel for claimants is that the award of learned Tribunal is based on conjectures and surmises. Deceased before his death was working on the post of Head Constable in the Police Department. At the relevant point of time, he was 48 years of age, his monthly income at that time was Rs.15,045/- and claimants were fully dependent upon him. Learned Tribunal has not properly awarded compensation for future prospects. As per judgment of the Supreme Court in Sarla Verma (Smt.) and Others vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and Another – (2009) 6 SCC 121 = 2009(1) CCR 276 (SC) = 2009(4) RLW 2785 (SC), appellants should have been granted benefit of future prospects because deceased was serving as Head Constable in Police Department and he had stable job and salaried income with prospects of increase by addition of increments and promotion as well as benefit of pay revisions and, therefore, 30% should be added to assess monthly income of deceased on the head of future prospects. 4. It is further contended that the compensation awarded by learned Tribunal on non-pecuniary heads is towards lower side. 4. It is further contended that the compensation awarded by learned Tribunal on non-pecuniary heads is towards lower side. Learned counsel further contended that keeping in view the ratio of judgment of the Supreme Court in Sarla Verma, supra, the Tribunal ought to have deducted 1/4th for own expenses of deceased as the number of dependents are four, whereas it has deducted 1/3rd, which is contrary to aforesaid judgment. 5. After considering submissions of learned counsel for parties and perusing material on record, I am of the view that as per judgment of Supreme Court in Sarla Verma, supra, multiplier of 13 should be applied instead of 12. In view of that very judgment of the Supreme Court, claimants are also entitled to benefit of future prospects at the rate of 30% on the determined monthly income, instead of 25%. Number of dependents being four, learned Tribunal has erred in deducting 1/3rd for own expenses of deceased whereas it should have deducted 1/4th in view of aforesaid judgment in Sarla Verma. Learned Tribunal has assessed monthly income of deceased at Rs.13037/- (rounded off to Rs.13,000/-). Adding thereto 30% future prospects, it would become Rs.16,900/-. After deducting 1/4th for own expenses of deceased, monthly loss of dependency would come to Rs.12,675/-. Keeping in view age of deceased at the relevant point of time, multiplier of 13 is adopted for calculating the compensation. Calculating thus, compensation under head of loss of dependency comes to Rs.19,77,300/- (12675x12x13). Award of Rs.27,000/- under non-pecuniary heads is maintained. 6. Appellants thus be entitled to receive a sum of Rs.20,04,300/- (Rupees twenty lac four thousand three hundred only) (1977300+27000), instead of Rs.15,87,096/-, as total compensation. Appellants would be entitled for interest at the rate of 6% on enhanced amount of compensation from the date of filing of claim petition till actual payment thereof. The amount of income-tax shall be deducted and remitted to Income-tax Department subject to assessment made by assessing authority. The appellants shall, for that purpose, be issued TDS certificate. Compliance of the order be made within three months. 7. Both the appeals accordingly stand disposed of. Stay application, filed with Appeal No.4085/2007, also stands disposed of.