Reva Khetrapal, J.

This appeal seeks to assail the award dated 3rd September, 1987 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Delhi in Suit No. 186/80 instituted on 29.12.1980 on the ground that the award amount is meagre and inadequate. At the outset, it may be mentioned that this case has a chequered history, Initially this appeal was dismissed in limine on 26.7.1988 by a learned Single Judge of this Court. A Letters Patent Appeal, being LPA No. 49 of 1988, was filed against the said dismissal in limine, which was decided on 15.2.2001 by a Division Bench of this Court, enhancing the award amount to Rs. 1,52,000/- with interest thereon. A review application, being CM No. 1147/2001, was filed against this judgment on the ground that the Counsel for the Insurance Company was present in the Court and yet it was recorded that none had come forward to represent the Insurance Company. The review application was allowed by passing the following order:

Respondent Insurance Company has filed this application seeking review of Court order dated 15.2.2001 "on the ground that company's Counsel Ms. Saroj Bidawat was present in the Court and yet it was recorded that nobody had come forward to represent Insurance Company to show that its liability was limited to Rs. 50,000/- only. She has subscribed an affidavit in support. Instead of holding any further inquiry to find out whether or not Insurance Company's Counsel was present, we find that the company had gone unheard in showing the extent of its liability. Therefore, interest of justice would demand that the company was heard in the matter afresh on merits. Application is accordingly allowed in view of this and Court Order dated 15.2.2001 is set aside. LPA 49/1988 shall revive and be considered and disposed of afresh. The amount deposited by Insurance Company pursuant to the impugned Court order shall remain intact till the disposal of LPA. Registry is directed to list LPA for disposal on 25th April, 2003.

2. Eventually, by its judgment dated 5.10.2009 the Division Bench disposed of the LPA sending the matter back to the Single Bench with the direction to the Single Judge that the same be disposed of on merits by passing a speaking order. This is how the appeal has come up for hearing before this Court.

3. It is apparent from a perusal of the Grounds of Appeal that the appellants are aggrieved by the manner in which compensation was assessed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal relating to the death of late Baldev Singh, who died in a road accident on 17.6.1980. The deceased Baldev Singh was unmarried and the appellants are his parents, who had filed the claim petition u/s 110A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, seeking compensation for his untimely demise in the sum of Rs. 2,40,000/- with interest @ 12% per annum with effect from the date of the filing of the claim petition till payment. It is alleged by the appellant-claimants that Baldev Singh was driving a two-wheeler scooter No. DLQ 9533 and was going from the Shahdara side to Delhi when tempo No. DHL 8945, driven rashly and negligently by the respondent No. 1, came from the Delhi side and after going, on the wrong side of the road, hit the two-wheeler scooter with its right front side, as a result of which Baldev Singh (hereinafter referred to as "the deceased") fell down and sustained fatal injuries.

4. The Claims Tribunal on the basis of the evidence adduced by the appellants including the evidence of the eye witness, held that the deceased had received fatal injuries as a result of the rash and negligent driving of the offending tempo by the respondent No. 1. After observing that the age of the deceased was 25 years 3 months, as on 17.6.1930, as per his birth certificate, the Claims Tribunal noted that according to PW-6 Jawandh Singh (the appellant No. 2), the deceased was employed by him at a salary of Rs. 750/- per month in his business, which he was carrying on in the name and style of M/s. Chawla Cycle Works, Railway