JUDGMENT :- By way of present petition, the petitioner challenges the order dated 30th September, 2006 passed by the learned Member of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ahmednagar, below Exhibits 9 and 10 in M.A.C.P. Darkhast No.25/2006, by which the objection of the present petitioner to the execution proceedings filed by the respondent, came to be rejected. 2. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Counsel for the respondent. 3. In a claim petition filed by the present respondent, initially award came to be passed on 30th September, 1997, for an amount of Rs.76,606/-. The said amount was also to carry interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of filing of the application till actual payment. Accordingly, an amount of Rs.1,23,000/- came to be deposited on 8th July, 1998. 4. Thereafter, an appeal filed by the claimant/respondent was allowed by this Court and the award was modified by awarding compensation of Rs.1,59,515/-. The said amount was also to carry interest from the date of filing of the application. 5. The objection petition was filed by the present petitioner to the execution proceedings on the ground that since an amount of Rs.1,23,000/- was already deposited, the total due including interest comes to Rs.50,217/-. The said amount is deposited by the petitioner and therefore claim is fully satisfied. The said objection came to be rejected. Hence, the present petition. 6. From the perusal of the order, it can be seen that the award passed by the Tribunal was for an amount of Rs.76,606/which was to carry interest from the date of application. The said award was modified by this Court to Rs.1,59,515/-. In that view of the matter, the principal amount as per the modified award due to the respondent was Rs.82,909/which was also to carry interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of application. Taking into consideration these aspects, the calculations arrived at by the learned Tribunal are just and proper. In so far as the interest on the amount already deposited is concerned, the claim of the respondent has been specifically rejected by the learned Tribunal. No infirmity can be found with the order passed by the learned Tribunal. The petition, therefore, deserves to be dismissed. 7. From the perusal of the petition and the averments made therein, it is apparent that the petitioner had no case at all. No infirmity can be found with the order passed by the learned Tribunal. The petition, therefore, deserves to be dismissed. 7. From the perusal of the petition and the averments made therein, it is apparent that the petitioner had no case at all. The order passed by the learned Tribunal was not only justified but well reasoned one giving no scope for any doubt. Just because the petitioner is a Corporation, and the officers of the Corporation do not have to pay from their pocket, they cannot have liberty to file frivolous litigation. In that view of the matter, I am inclined to impose costs on the petitioner/Corporation. 8. In the result, the Writ Petition is dismissed summarily. However, the petitioner/Corporation is directed to pay costs which is quantified at Rs.3,000/-. The costs be paid to the High Court Legal Services Sub-Committee at Aurangabad within a period of four weeks from today. In case of failure to deposit costs within the stipulated period, the Managing Director of the petitioner/Corporation shall be personally held responsible for contempt of this Court. 9. Authenticated copy of this order be supplied to the learned Counsel for the petitioner by Court Shirastedar. Petition dismissed.