Judgment Rakesh Kumar Garg, J. 1. This is insurer-s appeal challenging the impugned award only on the ground that compensation granted by the Tribunal is on the higher side. 2. Admittedly, the appellant-Insurance Company was not granted permission under Section 170 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 to contest the case on merits and take up all those defences which are available to the owner/driver of the offending vehicle. However, the contention of the learned counsel for the appellant is that application filed under Section 170 of the Motor Vehicles Act was filed before the Tribunal, however, the same has not been decided and therefore, the award is liable to be set aside. 3. I have heard learned counsel for the appellant. However, 1 find no merit in the arguments raised. 4. Admittedly, the application under Section 170 of the Motor Vehicles Act. 1988 was tiled by the appellant-Company at the initial stage and the issues were framed thereafter. No such issue was claimed by the appellant-Insurance Company before the Tribunal. Neither the appellant- Company had raised the aforesaid objection, as taken before this Court during the pendency of the claim petition before the Tribunal. Further from the perusal of the award, it is found that no evidence was led by the appellant-Company except raising an objection in its pleadings that the petition has been filed by the claimants in collusion with driver and owner of the offending vehicle. In view thereof, I find no merit in this appeal. Dismissed.