JUDGMENT 1. - This is an appeal against the judgment and award dated 20th February, 2009 passed by the Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bikaner, vide which, the claimants have been awarded Rs. 9,29,000/- as compensation. 2. The only argument raised by the learned counsel for the appellant is that the income of the deceased has been assessed on the higher side. It was further stated that while computing the income, the net salary should have been taken into consideration and not the gross salary. In the present case, the salary was Rs. 3,000/- and allowance was Rs. 3750/-. The allowance is essentially paid to the driver for his day-to-day expenditure during his vehicle driving. Therefore, the amount termed of allowance cannot be computed towards income. 3. Learned counsel for the respondents, however, submitted that Ex.7 is the salary certificate. Admittedly, the deceased was working as a driver on a bus. He had a license for driving a heavy transport vehicle. Thus, the salary of Rs. 6750/- cannot be considered excessive.In fact, it is reasonable salary of a driver of a transport vehicle. The same amounts to only Rs. 225/- per day. 4. Heard. The deceased was 40 years of age. He is survived by his mother, wife and 8 minor children. 5. Admittedly, the deceased was a driver. He was working as a driver with Sharma Travels and Shrinath Travels Agency. Ex.7 is the salary certificate produced by the son of the deceased witness AW 4. As per the salary certificate, Rs. 3000/- were paid towards salary and Rs. 3750/- towards allowances, thus the deceased received a total amount Rs. 6750/- per month. The argument that the allowance was for daily needs of the deceased himself and does not contribute towards the expenses incurred by the family cannot be sustained. Even house rent is an allowance, besides the dearness allowance. The break-up of the allowance has not been placed on record. Therefore, there is no evidence to show that the allowance was the allowance to be exclusively used by the driver himself. Even if the said argument is accepted, the same shall have no bearing on the income computed for the purpose of compensation as the Tribunal has deducted ⅓rd of the total income as having spent by the driver on himself. Thus, the amount towards the allowances amounting to Rs. Even if the said argument is accepted, the same shall have no bearing on the income computed for the purpose of compensation as the Tribunal has deducted ⅓rd of the total income as having spent by the driver on himself. Thus, the amount towards the allowances amounting to Rs. 3750/- cannot be deducted on the one side by holding that the said allowances were towards the personal expenditure of the driver and, thereafter, also deduct ⅓rd from the salary as the amount being spent by the deceased on himself. 6. The multiplier of 16 was adopted taking into account that his age was 40 years. 7. In view of the above, no fault can be found with the award of the Tribunal, vide which, the total income of the deceased was considered as Rs. 6750/- per month. By deducting ⅓rd of the salary, amount of Rs. 2250/- as having spent by the deceased on himself, the balance amount of Rs. 4500/- is rightly considered the amount used for the requirement of the family which under no circumstances can be considered on the higher side taking into consideration that there were ten claimants, including the wife, four minor sons and four minor daughters, as well as one widow mother.No other argument was raised.The appeal is dismissed accordingly. The stay application No.7056/2009 also stands dismissed.Appeal dismissed. *******