JUDGMENT

M.S. Sonak, J. - Heard Mr. Amey Kakodkar for the Appellant, Mr. Joaquim Godinho for Respondents No.6 and 7.

2. Respondents No.1 to 5 Original Claimants, though served, are neither present nor represented.

3. Mr. Kakodkar points out that he has been informed that Respondent No.5, the mother of the deceased Satish Shivram Malik, who was 77 years old when the claim petition was instituted in the year 2009 has since expired. The impugned award indicates that 50% of the compensation was awarded to the widow and the balance of 50% was ordered to be distributed between the three minor children of Satish and Sarita, and Respondent No.5 i.e. mother of Satish. At this stage, therefore, it will not be appropriate to adjourn the hearing in this appeal. This appeal was instituted in the year 2012. Suitable orders can always be made to protect the interest of representatives of Respondent No.5 which might include Respondents No.1 to 4 as well.

4. The challenge in this appeal is to the impugned Judgment and Award dated 22.07.2011 by which Motor Accident Claims Tribunal has held that the driver of the bus bearing no. GA-01-T-4087 was responsible for the accident in which Satish Shivram Malik