JUDGMENT :

1. As per office report dated 10.09.2019, notice dispatched to the respondent nos.1 and 2 by registered post AD has been returned undelivered. It is also reported that as sufficient period has elapsed from the date of issuance of notice, hence service of notice upon respondent nos. 1 and 2 is deemed sufficient in view of Chapter VIII Rule 12 of the High Court Rules.

2. Heard Sri Anuj Shukla and Sri Nigmendra Shukla, learned counsels for the appellants and perused the record.

3. This appeal, at the behest of the claimants, challenges the judgment and award dated 28.01.2011 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Additional District Judge, Court No.9, Bulandshahr (hereinafter referred to as 'Tribunal') in M.A.C. Case No. 73 of 2006 awarding a sum of Rs.1,52,000/- as compensation with interest at the rate of 6%.

4. The accident is not in dispute. The issue of negligence decided by the Tribunal is also not in dispute. The only issue to be decided is the quantum of compensation awarded.

5. It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that the deceased was 21 years