JUDGMENT B.P. Katakey, J. 1. By this writ petition the petitioner sought to invoke the jurisdiction of this court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India by challenging the judgment and award dated 30.7.2001 passed in MAC Case No. 347 of 1998 and other claim cases arising out of same accident, passed by the learned Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kamrup at Guwahati awarding a sum of Rs. 2,20,000 as compensation and directing the insurance company, i.e., the petitioner to satisfy the award in so far as it is relates to MAC No. 347/98. This present writ petition is confined to the award insofar as it relates to MAC 347/98. 2. I have heard Mr. Bikash Joity Kar Purakayastha, learned counsel for petitioner and B.K. Jain, learned counsel appearing, on behalf of the respondent Nos. 2, 3 and 4 who are the claimants in MAC 347/98. None appears on behalf of respondent No. 1 in spite of service of notice. Though this court vide order 12.10.2001 has issued notice of motion, this matter is taken up for disposal as agreed to by the learned counsel for the parties, as the case is pending for about 4(four) years. 3. The facts leading to filing of the present writ petition is that the predecessor in interest of the claimants 2 to 4 died arising out of an accident involving motor vehicle bearing Registration No. AS-01-BO-757(Bus) occurred on 25.5.1993. The claimant/respondents there after filed a claim petition being MAC No. 347/98 before the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kamrup, Guwahati, claiming a sum of Rs. 5,40,000/- as compensation against the owner and the Driver. The present writ petitioner was also made a party respondent in the said claim case as O/P No. 1, as at the relevant point of time the vehicle was insured by a valid insurance policy issued by it. The learned Tribunal upon perusal of the materials on record awarded a sum of Rs. 2,20,000 as compensation for the death of the predecessor in interest of the respondents/claimants and since there was valid insurance policy, directed the writ petitioner insurance company to satisfy the said award along with interest awarded by learned Tribunal. 4. Mr. The learned Tribunal upon perusal of the materials on record awarded a sum of Rs. 2,20,000 as compensation for the death of the predecessor in interest of the respondents/claimants and since there was valid insurance policy, directed the writ petitioner insurance company to satisfy the said award along with interest awarded by learned Tribunal. 4. Mr. Purakayastha, learned counsel for the insurance company confines his argument only to the point of quantum of compensation and submits that the award passed by the learned Tribunal is bad in law as the learned Tribunal while assessing the amount of compensation payable for the death of the predecessor in interest of the respondents, has not taken into consideration the personal expenses incurred by the deceased and has not deducted said amount from the income while calculating the loss of dependency. According to the Mr. Purakayastha, learned counsel for the petitioner, said award being not just and reasonable, this court by invoking, jurisdiction Under Section 227 of the Constitution of India should interfere with the award passed by the learned Tribunal. The monthly income, the age of the deceased, factum of accident and issuance of insurance policy are not in dispute in the instant case. 5. Mr. B.K. Jain, learned counsel for the claimants/respondents submits that power of the writ court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is very limited and is to be exercise very sparingly and with great caution. The writ court in exercising the power under Article 227 of the Constitution of India cannot act as an appellate forum over the award passed by the learned Tribunal more so when the appeal filed by the insurance company challenging the quantum of compensation is not maintainable. The further submission of the Mr. Jain, learned counsel for the respondents is that the learned Tribunal has not committed any illegality in assessing the compensation awardable for the death of the predecessor in interest of the claimants and this court keeping in view the misery of the claimants should not interfere with the award pass by the learned Tribunal awarding a sum of Rs. 2,20,000/- as compensation. 6. The power of High Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is well settled. 2,20,000/- as compensation. 6. The power of High Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is well settled. The jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is supervisory jurisdiction of the High Court to keep the subordinate courts or Tribunal within the bounds of law and to see whether an inferior court or Tribunal has proceeded within its Jurisdictions. The High court cannot in exercise of such supervisory jurisdiction sit on appeal over a decision of the Tribunal and also cannot correct all the errors of judgment, even if such error is committed by the learned Tribunal while deciding the case. The High Court can exercise of the power under Article 227 of the Constitution of India only in the event such error is patent and shockingly illegal. It is also not permissible to the High Court to re-appreciate or re-assess the evidence on record in exercise of power under Article 227 of the Constitution of India and said power is to be exercise very sparingly and in far and rare cases. 7. In the instant case the husband of the claimant/respondent No. 2 and the father of the respondents/claimant Nos. 3 and 4 who was the bread winner, died in a motor accident, thereby putting the entire family in a grave financial crisis. Tribunal after consideration of materials on records has awarded sum of Rs. 2,20,000 as compensation payable by the owner of the vehicle to the claimants and since there was a valid insurance policy, the same award was directed to be satisfied by the insurer writ petitioner by learned Tribunal. The submission put forwarded by the learned counsel for the writ petitioner that the learned Tribunal has failed to deduct the amount which must have been spent by the deceased towards his personal expenses while computing the loss of dependency and therefore, this court should interfere with such award in exercise of the power under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, can not be accepted, in view of the fact that the present award is not shockingly exorbitant and, therefore, this court is not inclined to interfere with the award passed by the learned Tribunal in exercise of its Jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 8. In view of the above, the writ petition stands dismissed. 8. In view of the above, the writ petition stands dismissed. The insurance company is directed to pay the balance amount as awarded by the learned Tribunal within a period of 2 (two) months from the date of the receipt of certified copy of this order, to be produced by the claimants/respondents before the Regional Manager of the Petitioner Company at Guwahati. No costs. Petition dismissed.