JUDGMENT : Muzaffar Hussain Attar, J. 1. This Appeal is directed against the Award dated 26th May, 2015, passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (for short Tribunal), Leh, Ladakh, on the principal ground that the Tribunal has not deducted 1/3rd amount from the income of the respondent-claimant. Mr. Haqani, learned counsel, appearing for the Appellant, made strenuous efforts to persuade the Court that 1/3rd amount from the income of the respondent-claimant is required to be deducted. In support of his contention, learned counsel referred to and relied upon judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court, reported in 2007 (4) SCC 631. Learned counsel, accordingly prayed that the impugned Award be modified to this extent. 2. Ms. Mokshaw, learned counsel, appearing for the respondent-claimant, referred to and relied upon judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court, reported in Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nazir Ahmad Chowdhary & Ors., 2010 (2) JKJ 291 [HC] and submitted that in similar circumstance, the Court has refused to deduct 1/3rd amount from the income of the respondent, while computing and awarding the compensation in favour of the claimant. 3. The respondent, driver of the vehicle, suffered injuries in a vehicular accident. He filed a claim petition before the Tribunal, Leh, Ladakh. The Tribunal passed an Award in an amount of Rs. 7 lacs + interest @ 7.50% per annum from the date of filing of claim petition till its realization. 4. The respondent-claimant is an injured person. 1/3rd amount is normally being deducted in cases where death occurs and where the claimants are the legal heirs of the deceased person. In such type of cases, the Court, in the facts and circumstances of the case, deduct some amount from the monthly income on the ground that the deceased person would have spent that amount as his personal expenditure, had he survived. When a person dies, nothing would be spent on him thereafter, so that amount would be taken out of the income of the claimant/s. In the present case, the respondent is an injured person and is claimant himself. The amount spent by the claimant on himself cannot be deducted from his income as he is alive and the amount would continue to be spent by him on himself. Even the personal expenditure would get increased with the passage of time. 5. The amount spent by the claimant on himself cannot be deducted from his income as he is alive and the amount would continue to be spent by him on himself. Even the personal expenditure would get increased with the passage of time. 5. This case is covered by judgment of this Court passed in case titled Nazir Ahmad Chowdhary, in which the Court has relied upon judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court for arriving at such conclusion. The judgment in Sunil Kumar's case, in which 1/3rd amount has been deducted towards miscellaneous expenses, would not be applicable to the facts of this case. Hon'ble the Supreme Court has not laid the law in the said judgment that as a matter of rule, 1/3rd amount, on account of miscellaneous expenditure, is to be deducted in every case. The apex court, in case titled Smt. Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transport Corporation, reported in 2009 (6) SC 495, while considering Sunil Kumar's case, has stated that deduction of 1/3rd amount cannot be made in all the cases. For the above stated reasons, this Appeal is held to be meritless and is, accordingly, dismissed along with connected IAs.