JUDGMENT 1. The Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation appealed against the award of the Tribunal challenging its liability and also the quantum of compensation. 2. According to the learned counsel for the Transport Corporation, the claimants have not established that the accident was due to the rash and negligent driving of the bus driver. Further, they were granted excessive compensation. 3. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the claimants would submit that eyewitness to the occurrence has established that the Corporation driver was at fault. But, there was no contra evidence. The Tribunal did not make correct deduction towards pleasure and other expenses from the income of the deceased. That has resulted in granting them a very less amount as compensation. 4. I have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the Transport Corporation as well as the learned counsel for the claimants, perused the case records and the findings of the Tribunal. 5. On 26.05.2003, at about 09.30 p.m., on the Bangalore High Road, near Nasaretpet Bus-Stop, one Benjamin Xavier, who came driven his motorcycle sustained motor accident injury and because of that he lost his life. In this accident, the bus belonging to the appellant Transport Corporation is involved. PW3-Jeyapaul, who was sipping tea at that time on the road side Tea shop near the accident place, deposed that the Transport Corporation bus came driven in a rash and negligent manner and hit against the Motorcyclist. Complaint has been lodged with regard to this accident. The driver of the Transport Corporation bus has been shown as an accused (see Ex.P1-FIR). After investigation, the police filed Ex.P4-Final Report alleging that the Transport Corporation bus driver by his rash and negligent driving is responsible for the death of Benjamin Xavier. There is no contra evidence on the side of the Transport Corporation. Not even the bus driver or conductor or anyone who had seen the accident had spoken about the manner of accident. In these circumstances, based on the positive evidence on record, the Tribunal has correctly held that due to the rash and negligent driving of the bus driver, the accident had happened in which the deceased had lost his life. 6. Now, we see the quantum aspect. Ex.P2-postmortem certificate and the evidence on the record discloses that then the deceased was 46 years old. The Tribunal adopted the multiplier 13. 6. Now, we see the quantum aspect. Ex.P2-postmortem certificate and the evidence on the record discloses that then the deceased was 46 years old. The Tribunal adopted the multiplier 13. Then the deceased was a Deputy Manager in Medimix Company, Thirumazhisai. As per Ex.P6-Salary Certificate, his total salary was Rs.7,619/-. Out of that, his leave salary is Rs.565/-. Deducting that the balance comes to Rs.7,054/-. Ex.P6 has been marked through PW2-Jeyakumar, a staff of the Company. 7. The Tribunal deducted 1/3rd from the salary of the deceased towards his pleasure and other expenses and calculated the compensation amount accordingly. There are four family members, who have depended upon his income. They are the claimants. As per the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in SMT.SARALA VERMA & ORS. Vs. DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION & ANOTHER [2009 (2) TN MAC 1 (SC)], when a married person dies in a fatal accident, leaving four persons, who have depend on his income, the deduction towards his pleasure and other expenses should be 1/4th. So, the correct deduction should be 1/4th and not 1/3rd. 8. Now, calculating on the above lines, the loss of dependency comes to Rs.8,25,240/-(Rs.7,054/--1/4 x 12 x 13). The Tribunal had awarded Rs.5,000/-each to appellants 2 to 4 for loss of love and affection of the deceased. The loss of love and affection of the deceased is immeasurable. Nothing is equivalence to that. But, it must be measured in terms of money. In the facts and circumstances, Rs.5,000/-is on the lower side. We make it Rs.10,000/- each to appellants 2 to 4 (Rs.10,000/- x 3 = Rs.30,000/-). In other respects, we are not interfering with the award of the Tribunal. 9. Accordingly, the award of the Tribunal is modified as follows: 10. In the result, the award amount is modified to Rs.8,70,240/-with interest @ 9% p.a., from the date of original petition till deposit. Appellant shall deposit the entire compensation amount within 4 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment less amount, if any already deposited. Respondents shall share the amount equally. On such deposit, the adult respondents are permitted to withdraw their share of compensation amount with accrued interest, less amount, if any already withdrawn. The respondents, who were shown as minors, on showing proof of their attaining majority, shall be permitted to withdraw the compensation amount with accrued interest. Respondents shall share the amount equally. On such deposit, the adult respondents are permitted to withdraw their share of compensation amount with accrued interest, less amount, if any already withdrawn. The respondents, who were shown as minors, on showing proof of their attaining majority, shall be permitted to withdraw the compensation amount with accrued interest. The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is disposed of as indicated above. No costs.