N. Kumar, J.

1. These three appeals are preferred against a common order passed by the claims Tribunal. Therefore, they are taken up for consideration together.

2. MVC No. 102/2008 is filed by Smt. Lalitha, for compensation claiming to be the first wife of the deceased Rudragouda Patil; MVC No. 73/2009 is also filed for compensation by Pushpa and Neethi, claiming to be the wife and daughter of deceased Rudragouda Patil. Both these petitions were clubbed with another petition, where claim for injury was made, common evidence was recorded and impugned order came to be passed, dismissing the petition filed by Pushpa and Neethi and MFA No. 24186 of 2012 is filed against the said dismissal order. In MVC No. 102/2008, while awarding compensation to Lalitha, a finding was recorded that Pushpa, the third respondent therein is not the wife of Rudragouda Patil and therefore, she is not entitled to any compensation. Therefore, Smt. Pushpa has preferred MFA No. 24051/2012. Smt. Lalitha, who claims to be the first wife, has also preferred MFA No. 24165/2012 seeking enhancement of co