1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR FIRST APPEAL NO. 1160 OF 2009. New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Pundlikrao Vithoba Jaunjalkar & Ano. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's Orders or Court's or Judge's Orders directions and Registrar's orders. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Shri S. M. Ukey Adv for appellant. Shri A. Hussain Adv for respondents. CORAM: C. L. PANGARKAR J. DATED: 14 th OCTOBER, 2009. This appeal has been preferred by the Insurance Company against whom an award of Rs. 3,18,000/- has been passed in a Motor Accident Claim. The son of Pundlikrao died in a motor accident. He, therefore, made a claim before the Tribunal. Tribunal found that the income of the deceased was Rs. 2500/-. After deduction of 1/3rd of 2 the amount income was taken at Rs. 1700/-, multiplier of 15 was applied and on the basis of the same a compensation of Rs. 3,18,000/- was awarded. The application was essentially filed by father alone. During the course of the evidence it was revealed that where abouts of the mother are still not known. Inspite of the fact that mother is not party to the petition, the learned Judge of the Tribunal directed that half of the amount be paid to the mother out of the compensation awarded by him. He directed the said amount to be deposited in Court and to be invested thereafter in nationalised bank. Insurance Company feels aggrieved by this order. Shri Ukey learned counsel for the appellant submits that the learned Judge should not have awarded any compensation to mother since mother was not party to the petition. After going through the judgment it is clear that compensation has been calculated on the basis of the income of the deceased and multiplier of 15 is applied by the Court. It is not that any separate compensation has been calculated 3 for the mother and separate compensation has been calculated for the father. A total amount of compensation has been calculated on the basis of the income. Learned Judge of the trial Court should not have however directed any amount to be paid to mother since mother is neither party to the petition and admittedly her where abouts are not known. In view of this I do not find that present appeal can in fact be admitted but the Insurance Company can certainly be permitted to withdraw the 50% amount deposited in the Court since such amount cannot be paid to mother as her where abouts itself are not known. As and when the mother may claim, the insurance company may contest the claim. 50% of the amount deposited in Court with 50% interest be paid to respondent No.1 and rest be refunded to Insurance Company. Appeal is dismissed in motion. svk JUDGE