JUDGMENT 1. 1. This appeal has been filed against the award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bharatpur on 18th July, 1985 where by claim of the appellants was partly allowed. 2. It will suffice for the purpose of this appeal to state that the claimants filed claim petition in the trial Court in respect of the death of their son in an accident occurred on 7th February, 1982. The claim was filed on 29th May, 1982. The trial Court after recording evidence of both the parties and hearing the arguments passed an award amounting to Rs. 45 000/- along with interest at rate 6% p.a. from the date of filing of the claim petition. 3. The contention of the learned Counsel Mr. Tripurari Sharma appearing for the appellants is that the claim was filed for award of Rs. 3,21,000/- but only Rs. 45,000/- have been awarded to the claimants He further points out that during the pendency of this appeal appellant No 1 Ram Narain has expired. An application Under Order 21, Rule 3, Civil Procedure Code dated 7th August, 1987 has been filed to bring legal representatives of the deceased on record. However, since Smt. Snail Kumari, mother of the deceased is already on record, it is not necessary to bring other legal representatives of deceased appellant No. 1 on record. 4. As per the provision of law the liability of the insurance company the respondent No. 3, is admittedly upto Rs. 50,000/- only. The whereabouts of respondents Nos. 1 and 2 the driver and the owner of the truck were not known hence they were served by means of substituted service. The respondent No. 4 is a formal party. 5. I have heard learned Counsel for the parties and have also gone through the award of the trial court. The learned Counsel for the appellant rightly expresses that the appellant No. 2 is an old lady and it will be almost impossible for her to trace the respondents Nos. 1 and 2 for recovery of any amount that may be awarded against them. However, he contended that keeping in view the evidence on record there is no reason why the insurance company, the respondent No. 3 be not made liable to pay compensation amount to the extent of its full liability of Rs. 50,000/-. 1 and 2 for recovery of any amount that may be awarded against them. However, he contended that keeping in view the evidence on record there is no reason why the insurance company, the respondent No. 3 be not made liable to pay compensation amount to the extent of its full liability of Rs. 50,000/-. It is also contended that the interest swarded at rate of 6 per cent p.a. by the learned Tribunal is also improper and the usual interest awarded in such cases is at rate of 12 per cent p.a. 6. The contention of Mr. S.N. Kumawat appearing for respondent No. 3 is that the trial Court has awarded appropriate amount as compensation and no further increase in the amount is called for. He also contends that no interference need be made in the rate of interest also. The deceased was a young man of 25 years of age and he was driver and had bright future. Keeping in view the evidence on record, I am inclined to increase the amount of of award to Rs. 50 000/-. In such matters usually the practice of the Court has been to award interest at the rate of 12% p.a. There is no reason why the interest at lesser rate to this be awarded to the appellant. 7. The amount of award is, therefore increased to Rs. 50,000/- (fifty thousand rupees only) and the appellants will be entitled to receive interest 12% p.a. from the date of filing of the claim application i.e. 29th May, 1982 It is made clear that the interest payable on the increased amount of Rs. 5,000/- shall also by payable of 12% p.a. from the date of filing of the claim petition itself. The respondent No. 3 shall make the increased payment within two months from today to the appellant No. 2.The appeal is partly allowed.appeal partly allowed. *******