JUDGMENT 1. - Instant appeal has been filed for enhancement of compensation of Rs. 5 lacs awarded by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sikar vide Award dated 3.2.2005 in MACT case No. 215/1999. 2. Claimants are wife, five minor children and parents of deceased Ramavatar, who died in motor accident on 2.6.1999. As alleged in claim petition, deceased was owner of one cold storage and was operating one Truck which he purchased on hire purchase scheme, out of which he used to spare Rs. 7,000/- per month for financial assistance to his family. But it is not in dispute that the deceased was not Tax payer meaning thereby his income was less than taxable income at relevant time. After the claim was filed, matter was taken up in Lok Adalat where claimants agreed for lump sum compensation of Rs. 5 lacs but for some technical reasons, insurer had not accepted that compensation settled in negotiations for amicable compromise among parties in course of Lok Adalat. Except oral testimony of claimants, nothing was placed on record in support of, their statements with regard to income of deceased and there was no material to show income from other sources deposed in evidence. In absence of cogent material, after taking note of totality of fact brought on record, including consent of claimants extended in amicable settlement negotiations in course of Lok Adalat, Tribunal finally awarded total compensation of Rs. 5 lacs with interest 6% from the date of claim petition. Hence this appeal. 3. Counsel for appellants submits that though consent was extended by claimants in December, 2002 and if amount would have. been paid at that time in course of amicable compromise negotiations during Lok Adalat, atleast that amount could have been deposited for investment where it could have carried higher interest than awarded by Tribunal and once consent was not carried out by respondents at relevant point of time, and matter was adjudicated upon merits, Tribunal was under obligation to examine material while determining just compensation and it ought not to have took note of amount agreed allegedly in course of Lok Adalat; as such finding recorded in awarding impugned compensation being not supported by material on record, requires interference by this Court. 4. I have considered contentions of counsel for appellants and with his assistance, examined material on record. 4. I have considered contentions of counsel for appellants and with his assistance, examined material on record. No material has been placed on record in support of oral testimony led in evidence by claimants with regard to total income of deceased. This fact remained undisputed that deceased was.not tax payer and claimants extended their consent for a sum of Rs. 5 lacs as just compensation during amicable compromise dated 16.1.2003 before Lok Adalat which was not accepted by insurer for want of approval under their rules of procedure obviously because of technicalities in way. In absence of cogent material but taking note of totality of facts brought on record including fact of compromise to which admittedly claimants had agreed on 16.1.2003 and the fact that deceased was owing one cold storage and carrying business from truck operation, Tribunal proceeded to compute and award compensation of Rs. 5 lacs which the claimants once agreed in course of amicable compromise at the time of Lok Adalat which is duly supported by material on record and in my opinion, what has been finally awarded to claimants under impugned award being just, does not require enhancement, 5. Counsel further submits that interest @ 6% P.A. has been awarded but is not clear as to from which date, compensation under award would carry interest. Obviously interest always carries from the date of claim petition, which he is otherwise entitled for. 6. Consequently, this appeal fails and is hereby dismissed in limine.Appeal dismissed. *******