In exceptional cases, the Court can enhance compensation even in the absence of an appeal or cross-objections if the interest of justice requires it.

( 1 ) THIS appeal preferred by the Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation hereinafter referred to as the K. S. R. T. C. has thrown up for determination a rather unusual and exceptional situation. Briefly stated, the point of law that is required to be set at rest is the question as to whether in the absence of an appeal or cross-objections filed by the claimants in a compensation claimed under the Motor Vehicles Act, if the circumstances warrant and justify, whether the appeal Court would be within its right to enhance the compensation that was originally awarded. Issues can never arise in a vaccum and therefore, the brief facts that have given rise to this situation are material.

( 2 ) ON 25-10-85 at about 8. 15 a. m. the B. T. S. bus bearing no. M. Y. F. 8124 was being driven along Lavelle Road and the deceased who was a 13 year old school boy studying in the Baldwin School was riding a bicycle on the same road on his way to school. The bus was alleged to have been driven rashly and negligently as a result of which the bus collided against the bicycle and the most gruesome part of the incident was that the bus ran over the young school boy who was killed on the spot. There is only one witness who has deposed about the incident who is the Priest of the St. Marks Church which is in the vicinity of the place where the incident took place. The record indicates that the road in question was out of bounds for the bus in so far as it was a 'no entry road' despite which the bus was being driven on that road. The Tribunal accepted the evidence P. W. 1 and held that the facts speak for themselves and consequently applied the doctrine of res ipsa loquitor and awarded compensation quantified at Rs. 40,000/- plus a sum of Rs. 2,500/- against funeral expenses aggregating in all Rs. 42,500/- with interest at the rate of 9% p. a. The Tribunal has justified the award of compensation on the ground that the evidence has indicated that the deceased was a bright boy who had done well in his studies and that it was also demonstrated that he had excelled in Sports and other extra curricular activities. The tribunal therefore took stock of the fact that the young student had the potential of embarking on a bright career and that in these circumstances it could be reasonably assumed that he would have done well for himself in life and, being the youngest son of the family that he would have in all probability been a source of support to his parents. The decision in question has been assailed by the Corporation principally on the ground that the evidence in this case is very minimal and that consequently, the finding of rashness and negligence against the driver of the bus is unjustified. In sum and substance, the Corporation disputes its liability.

( 3 ) WHEN the appeal came up for hearing, it did appear to me that the compensation awarded in this case was inadequate. The respondents' learned Advocate stated that after the loss of their son, the parents were in a state of shock and distress. He also stated that after the decision of the Tribunal, the learned Advocate who had conducted the matter had passed away and that his clients were altogether in no position to either file an appeal or cross-objections but he has advanced a strong plea that in the interest of justice, the Court should award compensation that is in consonance with what the claimants would legitimately be entitled to. In view of the fact that this was a case in which no appeal or cross-objections had been filed by the original claimants, I passed an order dated 12-8-97 calling upon the Corporation to show cause as to why the original compensation should not be enhanced. The order dated 12-8-97 is reproduced below :-"i have heard the appellant's learned Advocate as also the respondents' learned Advocate. The deceased was a young school boy who was run over by a B. T. S. bus in Bangalore City. The compensation claim for Rs. 2 lakhs was presented to the Tribunal