Anil Kumar Sharma J.;— Both these appeals pertain to the same motor accident and the grounds of challenge of the award are also same so they have been heard together and are being disposed of with this common order. We have heard learned counsel for the appellant and perused the impugned award and also the papers filed along with memo of appeals. It appears that on 21.12.2010 at about 9.50 P.M. Devendra along with his friend Sujeet Kumar were coming to Meerut from Roorki in ALTO Car bearing registration no. UP 15AK 6027 and when they reached in between villages Falauda and Barla the driver of the bus no. UP 85Z 9343 driving the same in rash and negligent manner came from opposite side and dashed with the aforesaid car causing serious injuries to both the occupants and the car was also badly damaged. Both the injured were taken to Medical College Meerut where they were declared dead. The legal representatives of the deceased filed separate claim petition before the Tribunal. In F.A.F.O. No. 556 of 2013 it was alleged that deceased Sujeet Kumar was aged about 45 years and he was engaged in brick klin business having monthly income of Rs. 50 000/-. The appellant contested the claim on the ground that driver of the car was driving the vehicle rashly and negligently and it is a case of contributory negligence. The parties led evidence and the Tribunal after hearing the counsel found that it was a case of composite negligence and the liability of the drivers of the appellant bus and the car was apportioned as 60% and 40% respectively. The income tax returns of three years of the deceased Sujeet Kumar was filed to prove his income. The Tribunal took income shown in the income tax returns and as per the age of the deceased applied multiplier of 13'. The number of dependents of Sujeet Kumar were more than four so 1/4 of his income was deducted for his personal and living expenses. The Tribunal has awarded Rs. 10 000/- under other heads. The total amount of compensation was calculated at Rs. 19 52 941/- and its 60% amounting Rs. 11 71 764/- together with interest @ 7% per annum from the date of petition till payment was awarded. The Tribunal has awarded Rs. 10 000/- under other heads. The total amount of compensation was calculated at Rs. 19 52 941/- and its 60% amounting Rs. 11 71 764/- together with interest @ 7% per annum from the date of petition till payment was awarded. In F.A.F.O. No. 556 of 2013 also the deceased Sujeet Kumar was posted as driver of Khatauli Depot of the appellant and his monthly pay was Rs. 15 460/- which was proved by examining the bill clerk of the appellant his annual income was taken at Rs. 18 85 520/-. Apart from it he was earning Rs. 8 000/- per month from agriculture the Tribunal disallowed the alleged income of the deceased from agriculture on the ground that agriculture land is still in hands of his legal representatives. According to the age of the deceased the multiplier of 13' were applied. The Tribunal has also deducted Rs. 2 000/- per month family pension of the widow of the deceased which to our mind was not proper. The Tribunal deducted 1/3 from the annual income of the deceased for his personal and living expenses as the number of claimants are three. The widow of the deceased was further awarded to Rs. 5 000/- for loss of consortium. No amount of compensation was awarded for funeral expenses and loss of estate. The 40% of the total compensation calculated was deducted for negligence of the car driver in the accident. In view of above discussion we find that Tribunal has not erred in apportioning the liabilities of the drivers of the vehicles involved in the accident. We further find that the Tribunal has awarded just and reasonable compensation to the claimants in both the cases and it is not excessive or arbitrary. In view of the aforesaid stated reasons we find that appeals sans merit and are accordingly dismissed. Statutory deposit made by the appellant in both the appeals be remitted back to the Tribunal concerned for adjustment within four weeks. _____________