ORDER 1. Heard Sri Chandra Kant, learned counsel for the claimants/appellants and Sri Ashok Priyadarshi, learned counsel for respondent no.3/National Insurance Company Limited both on Memo of Appeal as well as Interlocutory Application. 2. The present Appeal has been filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, primarily for enhancement of the compensation amount. The Appeal has been preferred against order dated 20.07.2009 passed by learned 1st Additional District Judge-cum-Motor Vehicle Accident Claims Tribunal, Nalanda at Biharsharif (hereinafter referred to as “Claims Tribunal”), in M.A.C.T. Case No. 33 of 2002. By the said judgment, the learned Claims Tribunal has directed the respondent no.3/insurer of the offending vehicle to make payment of total compensation amount of Rs. 10,12,160/-, which includes loss of consortium, funeral expenses etc. It was argued that the deceased, who was a Government employee, was getting salary per month to the tune of Rs. 10,850/-, however; his income has been considered only to the extent of Rs. 9,665/- for calculating the compensation amount. It was further pleaded that despite the fact that compensation was allowed by the Claims Tribunal, the Claims Tribunal grossly failed to direct the insurer to pay the interest amount from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of realization. 3. In this case, in preferring the Appeal, one year, one month and nine days delay has occurred and as such, Interlocutory Application i.e. I. A. No. 442 of 2011 has been filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condoning the delay. It has been pleaded that after the judgment and award, the Insurance Company has preferred a review petition, vide Review No. 02 of 2009 and the claimants had participated in the said review also. This was one of the reasons for delay in filing the Appeal. Besides this, other ground has also been taken for condoning the delay and appellants have tried to explain the delay in filing the Appeal. 4. Sri Ashok Priyadarshi, learned counsel for the Respondent No.3/National Insurance Company Ltd. has vehemently opposed the prayer for even condoning the delay. It was submitted by Sri Priyadarshi that judgment in the case was passed on 20.07.2009. In the judgment, it was made clear that if the compensation amount is not paid within one month from the date of the order, interest at the rate of 6% per annum was required to be paid. It was submitted by Sri Priyadarshi that judgment in the case was passed on 20.07.2009. In the judgment, it was made clear that if the compensation amount is not paid within one month from the date of the order, interest at the rate of 6% per annum was required to be paid. He submits that the Insurance Company had preferred review on the ground that in the claim petition, due to inadvertence, specifically it was not pleaded that driver of the offending vehicle had no valid driving licence and as such, according to insurer/respondent no.3, the owner of the offending vehicle was liable to be directed for making payment of compensation amount. He submits that the claimants/appellants had participated in the review petition. Even during hearing of the review petition, the appellants never made complaint that interest amount was not directed to be paid from the date of filing of the claim petition. He submits that once in review petition, the appellants appeared and did not raise any objection, it will be deemed that appellants had accepted the judgment of the Claims Tribunal. He further submits that after rejection of the review petition, the Insurance Company has paid compensation amount alongwith interest @ 6% per annum from the date of order passed by the Claims Tribunal till the date of payment. He further submits that the multiplier was adopted at higher side. While clarifying the income of the deceased, it was submitted that ten thousand and odd was gross salary, not net income. On the basis of net income, calculation of compensation has been done, which is not contrary to any provision. According to Sri Priyadarshi, the learned Claims Tribunal has rightly considered the net income of the deceased and passed order for granting compensation. Sri Priyadarshi has tried to justify the judgment on the point of interest by arguing that in this case, compensation amount is more than ten lacs and as such, the learned Claims Tribunal has rightly not directed for paying interest from the date of filing of the claim petition. Sri Priyadarshi has tried to justify the judgment on the point of interest by arguing that in this case, compensation amount is more than ten lacs and as such, the learned Claims Tribunal has rightly not directed for paying interest from the date of filing of the claim petition. In view of the fact that the Claims Tribunal against the settled principle of law had not directed for paying interest on compensation amount from the date of filing of the claim petition till the realization of the compensation amount, the Court was persuaded to condone delay in filing the Appeal and as such, the Interlocutory Application i.e. I.A. No. 442 of 2011 is allowed and delay in filing the Appeal stands condoned. 5. Sri Priyadarshi has rightly submitted that calculation of compensation is to be made on the basis of net income, not on gross income and as such, I do not find any infirmity in the order, so far as compensation amount is concerned. However, fact remains that learned Claims Tribunal has erroneously not directed for paying interest on the compensation amount from the date of filing of the claim petition. Learned counsel for the claimants/appellants has referred a judgment, reported in 2005 (2) PLJR 230 (State of Bihar Vs. Janardan Prasad Singh), to substantiate his argument that in such cases, interest is required to be calculated from the date of filing till the date of realization. This submission has not been disputed by learned counsel for the respondent no.3/National Insurance Company Limited. 6. The Court is of the opinion that in such cases, interest was required to be paid from the date of filing of the claim petition, since cause of action arose from the date of filing of the claim petition. Accordingly, the judgment dated 20.07.2009 is modified to the extent of making payment of interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of judgment. It has been admitted by Sri Priyadarshi that interest @ 6% per annum has already been paid to the claimants/appellants, which has been calculated from the date of judgment till the date of payment, which has been made in the year 2010. Appeal stands allowed to the extent of granting interest, as indicated above.