Heard Mr. P. Gautam, learned counsel appearing for the appellant as well as Mr. P. S. Roy, learned counsel appearing for the respondents No.1, 2 and 3 and Mr. K.K. Pal, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.4.

2. By this appeal by the insurer, the judgment and award dated 27.05.2013 delivered in TS (MAC) No.39 of 2012 has been called in question. From the memorandum of appeal as well as from the submission of Mr. P. Gautam, learned counsel who is representing the appellant, it appears that this appeal is structured fundamentally on three grounds of objection viz. (1) the deduction as made from the income of the deceased is contrary to the law as decided by the apex court in Sarla Verma and others vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and another reported in (2009) 6 SCC 121, (2) the loss of future prospect as added to the loss of dependency has been added wrongly as whether the ratio in Santosh Devi vs. National Insurance Company Ltd. reported in (2012) 6 SCC 421 and ratio in Rajesh vs. Rajbir Singh reported in (2013) 9 SCC 54 is in conflict with the ratio as decided in Reshma Kumari vs. Madan Mohan reported in (2013) 9 SCC 65 and hence to revisit the law, the