JUDGMENT : Hon’ble Servesh Kumar Gupta, J. Having heard learned Counsel for the parties, it transpires that the deceased lost his life at the young age of 30 years in an accident occurred on 31.12.2003, when he was travelling in the Esteem Car on Jaipur Ajmer National Highway. When he was going as such, a truck coming from behind collided with his car while trying to overtake the vehicle of the deceased from the left side, and it resulted in this mishap. 2. The Tribunal has assessed the total compensation to the tune of rupees fifty-five lakhs. Dependency was calculated at the income of rupees four lakhs eighty thousand per annum, which was suggested by the Counsel of the insurance company itself at the time of cross-examination of PW1 Sunder Lal Sharma, the father of the deceased. So, all other arguments on behalf of the insurance company at this stage that the deceased was not working/employed at the relevant time loss significance. 3. Further, even if it is accepted for a moment that the deceased was out of employment at the time of accident, the fact couldn’t be lost sight of that he was a highly qualified person and was very young too. Previously he was employed in a multinational company at Saudi Arabi and was getting monthly salary of rupees seventy five thousand. Thereafter he switched over to another multinational company in Mumbai, where he was getting rupees sixty five thousand per month. Thus, it is quite evident that the deceased being highly qualified was able to get some suitable job with decent remuneration as highlighted above. However, the Court is not inclined to consider all these complications because before the Tribunal concerned, the learned Counsel of the insurance company itself suggested the annual income of the deceased to be rupees four lakhs and eighty thousand. So, the Tribunal concerned has rightly assessed the compensation on this income. 4. As regards the multiplier, as per Sarla Verma case, it should have been 16 instead of 17. Thus, the multiplier is modified from 17 to 16. 5. Since the deceased was married man having young wife and a child, so, naturally he would have spent one-third of the total income to meet out his personal expenses. So, he would have spared two-third of the entire income for his family. Thus, the compensation is calculated as under. Thus, the multiplier is modified from 17 to 16. 5. Since the deceased was married man having young wife and a child, so, naturally he would have spent one-third of the total income to meet out his personal expenses. So, he would have spared two-third of the entire income for his family. Thus, the compensation is calculated as under. 4,80,000 X 2/3 = 3,20,000 3,20,000 X 16 = 51,20,000 Thus, the compensation is calculated as rupees fifty-one lakhs and twenty thousand. 6. Learned Counsel of the insurance company has submitted that on this high income, the deceased would not have spared from the income tax deductions. Although income of rupees one lakh was exempt at that time, but on the remaining income, the tax @ 10 per cent, 20 per cent and 30 per cent under different slabs was leviable. So, on average, the income tax deductions should be calculated @ 20 per cent. 7. I think, in such matters where high income is evaluated, income tax deductions should not be spared. However, the Court is not inclined to disturb the findings as regards the loss of consortium, expenses of cremation, pain and suffering, etc. 8. Thus after deducting 20 per cent towards income tax, the award is modified from rupees fifty five lakhs to rupees forty lakhs ninety six thousand plus rupees thirty thousand as consortium, rupees five thousand for cremation and rupees twenty five thousand for pain and suffering. Thus, the total modified amount of award comes to rupees forty-one lakhs fifty six thousand. Rupees fifteen lakhs have already been deposited and the same is invested in Term Deposit with a nationalised bank, as was directed by this Court on 23.8.2006. Rest of the amount will be deposited by the insurance company within six weeks positively. If the amount is not so deposited, that will incur the interest @ nine per cent per annum. Registry shall immediately remit the amount of compulsory deposit to the Tribunal concerned. The aforesaid amount of compensation shall be released in favour the claimants as per the respective share without asking any surety or security from them. 9. Learned Senior Counsel for the claimants informed that one of the claimants, namely, Sri Sunder Lal Sharma (father of the deceased) has passed away. The aforesaid amount of compensation shall be released in favour the claimants as per the respective share without asking any surety or security from them. 9. Learned Senior Counsel for the claimants informed that one of the claimants, namely, Sri Sunder Lal Sharma (father of the deceased) has passed away. So, the share of the compensation amount granted to Sri Sunder Lal Sharma shall be released in favour of his wife Smt. Rajeshwari Sharma. 10. Consequently, the appeal is partly allowed. Let the lower court record be sent back.