ORDER 1. This application has been filed pointing out certain error apparent on the face of the record in the matter of settlement arrived at in the Lok Adalat of High Court held on 23rd of September, 2006 while disposing of M.A.No.86/2005. Seeking correction of the aforesaid error, the Insurance Company has filed this application. 2. Arising out of an award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Seoni in Motor Accident Claim Case No.15/2002, the claimants preferred an appeal under section 173 of the Motor Vehicle Act seeking enhancement of the compensation. The matter was taken up in the Lok Adalat, which was held on 23rd of September, 2006 and the same was settled by enhancing the compensation by a sum of Rs.1,70,000/- (Rupees One Lac Seventy Thousand Only). 3. It is pointed out by Shri Pranay Gupta, learned counsel for the Insurance Company that in the award passed by the Tribunal on 8th of September, 2004, the liability for payment of compensation was fastened both on the Insurance Company and the owner of the bus namely, Madhya Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation and both were liable to pay 50% of the amount of compensation. However, when the award was passed in the Lok Adalat, this aspect of the matter was lost sight of, as a result, the Insurance Company is saddled with the liability for paying the entire amount of compensation, therefore, it is submitted by learned counsel for the Insurance Company that the settlement award be corrected and 50% of the amount of compensation be directed to be paid by the owner of the vehicle i.e. the MP State Road Transport Corporation. 4. Even though Shri Uttam Maheshwari, learned counsel for the Corporation submitted that as on date keeping in view the financial status of the Corporation, they may not be in a position to make any payment but on such submission, neither any review is filed nor any application for the same is submitted, on the contrary, records indicate that in the Lok Adalat, which was held on 23rd of September, 2006, the Corporation was represented by their representatives and they had agreed to the enhancement of the compensation. 5. In view of the same, the objections and the submissions made by Shri Uttam Maheshwari are over-ruled. 6. 5. In view of the same, the objections and the submissions made by Shri Uttam Maheshwari are over-ruled. 6. Considering the totality of the facts and circumstances and on perusal of the award passed by the tribunal, we find that while awarding the compensation, the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal in it's order dated 8th of September, 2004, after determination of the compensation, in Paragraph 19 has directed for payment of the compensation equally between the Insurance Company and the owner of the vehicle i.e. the State Road Transport Corporation. That being so, when the matter is settled in the Lok Adalat, the liability is settled in equal proportion both by the Insurance Company and the M.P. State Road Transport Corporation/ owner of the bus in question. 7. Accordingly, as the settlement arrived at in the Lok Adalat is silent, we modify the settlement arrived at in the Lok Adalat to the following effect: 8. “The amount of compensation agreed to be paid in the Lok Adalat held on 23rd of September, 2006 shall be paid equally by the Insurance Company and the Respondent/ MP State Road Transport Corporation in accordance with the directions already issued by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal in Paragraph 19 of the award in question dated 8th of September, 2004. 9. With the aforesaid modification to the settlement arrived at in the Lok Adalat on 23rd of September, 2006, this application stands disposed of.