JUDGMENT : - Mansoor Ahmad Mir, Chief Justice (Oral) The appellants-parents of deceased-Kuldeep Chand @ Pappi have questioned the award, dated 19th April, 2012, made by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Fast Track Court , Ghumarwin, District Bilaspur, H.P. (hereinafter referred to as “the Tribunal”) in M.A.C. No. 14/2007, titled as Janki Devi and another versus Dharampal and others, filed by the appellants for grant of compensation on the ground that their son, namely Kuldeep Chand @ Pappi, while going from Dangar to Village Hari Talyananger, became the victim of vehicular accident, allegedly caused by the driver, namely Kamlesh Kumar, while driving jeep, bearing registration No. HP-67-1078, rashly and negligently on 11th March, 2007, at about 9.10 A.M. The claim petition was determined and compensation to the tune of ` 4,65,000/- with interest @ 7.5% came to be awarded in favour of the appellants being the parents and respondent No. 4 being widow of the deceased from the date of filing of the petition till deposit of the amount; respondent No. 4-widow was held entitled to 75% of the awarded amount and remaining 25% of the awarded amount was to be shared equally amongst the appellants-parents (hereinafter referred to as “the impugned award), on the grounds taken in the memo of appeal. 2. The owner-insured, the driver, the insurer and the widow have not questioned the impugned award on any count, thus, has attained finality so far it relates to them. 3. The claimants-parents-appellants have questioned the impugned award only on the ground of apportionment of the awarded amount. It is contended that the parents have lost their son and they are entitled to compensation and the widow, who is living separately, is not entitled to the amount awarded in terms of the impugned award. 4. I have gone through the impugned award. Smt. Swaran Lata, who is stated to be 34 years of age and is living separately, is deprived of love and affection of her husband, the matrimonial home and other aspects of the life, which she could have shared with her husband only. The parents, i.e. the mother and the father, are old enough crossing the age of 74 and 80 years, respectively. It is also stated that they have another son who is public servant, i.e. the employee of the State Government. 5. The parents, i.e. the mother and the father, are old enough crossing the age of 74 and 80 years, respectively. It is also stated that they have another son who is public servant, i.e. the employee of the State Government. 5. Thus, in the given circumstances, I am of the considered view that the amount awarded in favour of the appellants-parents is more than what is required. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed and the impugned award is upheld. 6. The Tribunal is directed to release the awarded amount in favour of the appellants-parents and the widow of the deceased in terms of the impugned award, if not already released. 7. Send down the records after placing copy of the judgment on record.