JUDGMENT Rajesh Kumar, J. – Heard the counsel for the appellant and counsel for the respondents. 2. It appears that son of the claimant/respondent Nos.1 and 5 has died in a road accident on 01.06.2012. 3. The claim petition has been filed on 13.07.2012. Accordingly, Claim Case being T.M.V. Claim Case No.59 of 2012 has been registered and after hearing the parties, learned Claim Tribunal has awarded the claim in favour of the claimants (respondent Nos.1 to 5) to the tune of Rs.9,72,000/-. The learned Claim Tribunal has considered the income of the deceased as Rs.6,000/- per month on the basis of the oral evidence. The deceased was unmarried and at the time of death, he was 24 years of age. Number of dependents are 5. The deceased was unmarried. The learned Claim Tribunal accordingly on the basis of said factor, has calculated the claim in which learned Tribunal has applied multiplier of 18 and further Rs.5000/- each has been granted towards funeral expenses and loss of estate. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant has challenged the present award on the ground that there is no evidence regarding the income, which has been considered by the learned Claim Tribunal. 5. From the perusal of the entire record, it appears that there is no documentary evidence but oral evidence is there. In that view of the matter, I am not inclined to interfere with the finding of the learned Claim Tribunal, as the amount assessed is Rs.6000/- per month otherwise is a reasonable amount. 6. So far as multiplier is concerned, the same has given as 18, which is in consonance of the order passed by the Hon''ble Apex Court in the case of Sarla Verma (Smt.) & Ors. Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation & Anr , (2009) 6 SCC 121 . 7. So far as contribution to the family is concerned, which has been decided by deducting 1/4th amount towards personal and living expenses of the deceased. 8. In the facts of present case, number of dependants are five and deceased was unmarried, so in my opinion, 1/3rd should be considered as personal expenses of the deceased and 2/3rd should be contributed to the family of the deceased. 9. Thus, from the above argument, there will be reduction in the compensation amount, if the contribution to the family is reduced from 3/4th to 2/3 rd. 9. Thus, from the above argument, there will be reduction in the compensation amount, if the contribution to the family is reduced from 3/4th to 2/3 rd. There will be some increase in the compensation amount, if more amount is given under the conventional heads as per the mandate of the Hon''ble Apex Court. 10. At this stage, with the consent of both the parties, without making calculation, the compensation amount is fixed as Rs.9,00,000/-. Accordingly, the award dated 18th June, 2014 passed in TMV Claim Case No.59 of 2012, is modified to the extent that instead of compensation of Rs.9,82,000/-, it should be Rs.9,00,000/- only with interest. 11. With the above observation and direction, this appeal is allowed. Cross Objection No.3 of 2015: 12. In view of the order passed in M.A. No.350 of 2014, this cross objection is also disposed of.