RAFIQ, J.—Claimants have preferred this appeal for en-hancement of compensation of Rs.2,84,000/- in a death claim, awarded by learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal & Essential Commodities Act, Jaipur, vide its award dt. 29.7.2004 in MAC Case No.1156/2004. 2. Only argument pressed by learned counsel for appellants is that there are five dependents and as per judgment of the Supreme Court in Sarla Verma (Smt.) and Ors. vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and Anr. – (2009) 6 SCC 121 = 2009(1) CCR 276 (SC) = 2009(4) RLW 2785 (SC), not more than 1/4th should have been deducted for self-expenses of deceased whereas learned Tribunal has wrongly deducted 1/3rd for his self-expenses while calculating compensation for loss of dependency. 3. Learned counsel for respondent opposed appeal and argued that judgment of the Supreme Court in Sarla Verma, supra, cannot be applied to facts of this case where accident took place long ago on 04.05.2002, therefore, learned Tribunal was justified in deducting 1/3rd for self-expenses. Learned counsel further argued that Statutory provisions clearly indicate that compensation must be “just” and it cannot be a bonanza; not a source of profit but the same should not be a pittance and in this case award passed by the learned Tribunal is just and reasonable and should not be interfered with. 4. On hearing learned counsel for parties and perusing record, I am of view that even though accident took place on 04.05.2002, ratio of judgment of the Supreme Court in Sarla Verma, supra, would apply to this pending appeal regardless that judgment was delivered much after the date of accident in present case. Argument of learned counsel for appellants that deduction for self-expenses of deceased should be only 1/4th keeping in view number of claimants, deserves acceptance. Learned Tribunal has assessed monthly income of deceased at Rs.2100/-, which has not been challenged by learned counsel for claimants. After deducting 1/4th therefrom towards his self-expenses, dependency comes to Rs.1575/- (2100-525). Learned Tribunal applied multiplier of 15, which is not under challenge. Calculating thus, compensation for loss of dependency would come to Rs.2,83,500/- (1575x12x15). The compensation of Rs.32,000/- under non-pecuniary heads i.e. funeral expenses, loss of consortium and loss of love and affection, is maintained. 5. Appellants thus be entitled to receive a sum of Rs.3,15,500/- (Rupees three lac fifteen thousand and five hundred only) (283500+32000), instead of Rs.2,84,000/-, as total compensation. Calculating thus, compensation for loss of dependency would come to Rs.2,83,500/- (1575x12x15). The compensation of Rs.32,000/- under non-pecuniary heads i.e. funeral expenses, loss of consortium and loss of love and affection, is maintained. 5. Appellants thus be entitled to receive a sum of Rs.3,15,500/- (Rupees three lac fifteen thousand and five hundred only) (283500+32000), instead of Rs.2,84,000/-, as total compensation. Appellants would be entitled for interest at the rate of 7.5% on enhanced amount of compensation from the date of filing of claim petition till actual payment thereof. Compliance of order be made within three months. Appeal accordingly stands partly allowed.