IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN, JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR. S. B. CIVIL MISC. APPEAL NO. 729/05 MAJID KHAN & OTHERS v ISHAK MOHD. & OTHERS DATE OF JUDGMENT : March 19 , 2008. Hon'ble Mr. Justice R. S. Chauhan Mr. J.P. Gupta for the appellants. Mr. R.S. Bhati for the Insurance Company. By Court: The parents, brothers and sisters of Rasid Khan, the deceased, have challenged the award dated 8.11.04 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Dausa ('the Tribunal', for short) whereby the learned Tribunal has granted a compensation of Rs. 2,24,400/- for the death of Rasid Khan. Briefly, the facts of the case are that on 17.4.2000 around 8.10 a.m. while Rasid Khan was going on his bicycle near the Vaishali Nagar Circle in Jaipur, a minibus, bearing Registration No. RNZ 1600, being driven in a rash and negligent manner, hit Rasid Khan. Consequently, he expired. The appellants who were financially dependent upon him filed a claim petition before the learned Tribunal. In order to substantiate their case they examined two witnesses and submitted fifteen documents. The respondent – Insurance Company did not examine any witness, but did submit a single document. After going through the oral and documentary evidence, the learned Tribunal granted the compensation as aforementioned. Hence, this appeal for enhancement. Mr. J.P. Gupta, the learned counsel for the appellant, has argued that only one-third of the income can be deducted as the amount the deceased would have spent upon himself. However, the learned Tribunal has erroneously deducted one-half of the income as the amount deceased would have spent upon himself. Such a deduction is legally untenable in the eye of law. On the other hand, Mr. R.S. Bhati, the learned counsel for respondent No.3, the National Insurance Company, has supported the impugned award. We have heard both the learned counsels and perused the impugned award and examined the record. The Second Schedule attached to the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 ('the Act', for short) clearly stipulates that while assessing the loss of dependency, the income earned by the deceased should be reduced only by one-third. For, the law creates a legal fiction that a person would have spent one-third of the income upon himself and two-third upon the family. However, while ignoring the mandate of law, the learned Tribunal has deducted one-half from his income as the income that Rasid Khan would have spent upon himself. Since such a deduction is unwarranted by law, it is legally untenable. Therefore, this court has no hesitation in deducting only one-third from the annual income which was assessed by the learned Tribunal as Rs. 25,920/-. Deducting one-third from this amount, Rasid Khan would have spent Rs. 17,280/- per annum upon his family. Therefore, the impugned award dated 8.11.04 is hereby modified as under :- Loss of Dependency 17,280 x 15 = Rs. 2,59,200/- To this limited extend the award stands modified. However, the rest of the award is confirmed. The learned Tribunal is directed to ensure that the enhanced amount is paid to the appellant within a period of two months from the date of the receipt of the certified copy of this order. With these observations this appeal is allowed. ( R.S. CHAUHAN ) J. MRG.