ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.

( 1 ) THIS Appeal has been preferred by the original respondent/appellant herein, Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation (for short "msrtc") under section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short "m. V. Act") and thereby, challenged the award and judgment dated 25th february, 1993, passed in Claim Petition No. 90 of 1989, whereby, the total compensation of Rs. 2,00,000/- and interest @ 12% p. a. from the date of Petition i. e. 18th October, 1989 has been awarded with other directions. Therefore, this appeal by the appellant. Facts:

( 2 ) ON 6-7-1989, one Zafarulla Khan died in the road accident near naka of anjangaon to Lakhd Road, due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the appellant. Therefore, two Claim Petition Nos. 90 of 1989 and No. 106 of 1989 were separately filed by the parents and brother i. e. respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3 herein and by the wife i. e. respondent No. 4 herein, respectively, and they accordingly claimed separate compensation. The common evidence was led by the parties of Darabkhan (PW1), Ramakant (PW2) in M. A. C. T. Case No. 90 of 1989. As per the case of the respondents, the deceased was earning Rs. 1,500/- per month or Rs. 18,000/- per year. He was the only earning member of the family. Therefore, the parents and brother claimed compensation of Rs. 3,80. 000/ -. However, they restricted their claim to Rs. 2,00,000/ -. On the other hand, respondent No. 4-wife in her Claim Petition No. 106 of 1989 also claimed the said monthly income and based on that, claimed Rs. 3,60,000/ -. However, she also restricted her claim to Rs. 2,00,000/- only. Appellants resisted the same by its Written Statement, including of driver. They also raised objection to tenability of the claim Petition on behalf of the parents and the brother. The learned tribunal, after considering the material, as well as, the evidence led by the parties by common impugned order, held that the accident in question was caused due to rash and negligent driving of S. T. Bus No. MCA-6062, driven by opponent/respondent No. 2 and owned by opponent/respondent No. 1. The deceased Zafarulla Khan was sitting on the pillion seat of the motorcycle bearing no. MXG-6618, driven by Ramakant Adhav at the time of the accident. The tribunal, therefore, awarded lump sum compensation of Rs. 2,00,000/- as under :"order both the petitions are allowed. The amount of total compensation is determined at Rs. 2,00,000/-plus interest at the rate of Rs. 12% p. a. from the date of petition i. e. 18-10-1989 till realization. The petitioners in claim petition No. 90/1989 and claim petition no. 106/1989 shall equally receive theamount of Rs. 50. 000/- each and the amount of interest from the S. T. Corporation. The amount of Rs. 25,0007- received by Maker Nigar is not to be adjusted while taking into account the amount of award of Rs. 2,00,000/- in this petition. The S. T. Corporation shall also bear the cost of petition filed by parents as well as Maker Nigar. The award be drawn accordingly. "submissions :

( 3 ) MR. Mehadia, the learned counsel appearing for the appellant basically resisted the impugned award and relied on 2004 (2) Mh. L. J. 668 (SC) = 2003 (8) scc 731, Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay vs. Laxman Iyer and anr. , 1987 Mh. L. J. (SC) 838 = AIR 1987 SC 1690, Gujarat State Road Transport corporation, Ahmedabad vs. Ramanbhai Prabhatbhai and anr. , AIR 1994 gauhati 22, Smt. Muhini Thakuria and ors. vs. Dhiraj Kalita and ors. , 2004 (2) all. M. L. R. 803, Smt. Mandabai wd/o Prabhakar Pudake vs. Daljitrai s/o dinanath Chhabra and ors. and contended further that the grant of the award is contrary to the record, as well as, the law laid down by the various Courts. There is non application of mind. He further contended that the brother - respondent no. 3 was not entitled for any compensation, not being the legal representative of the deceased. That the respondent No. 4- wife who remarried later on, was also not entitle