JUDGMENT : N.K. Patil, J. 1. These two appeals are by the claimants and the Insurer against the impugned common judgment and award dated 5th December, 2012 passed in M.V.C. No. 148/2012 on the file of the Principal Civil Judge (Sr. Dvn.) and Additional M.A.C.T.-IV, Chitradurga (hereinafter referred to as 'Tribunal' for short). The Tribunal by its impugned common Judgment and Award, awarded a sum of Rs. 4,40,000/- with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realisation on account of the death of the deceased late Sri. Muralidhara Beeranna Nayak in the road traffic accident. The claimants have filed the appeal on the ground that the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is inadequate and requires enhancement. On the other hand, the Insurer has filed the appeal on the ground that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is exorbitant and disproportionate to the income of the deceased and the same is liable to be reduced. The brief facts of the case of the claimants are that appellant No. 1 is the wife and appellant Nos. 2, 3 and 4 are daughters of the deceased late Muralidhara Beeranna Nayak Parumane. They have filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, claiming compensation against the Insurer and owner on account of untimely death of the deceased in a road traffic accident that occurred on 29.10.2011 at about 4.00 p.m. due to rash and negligent driving by the Driver of the Tipper Lorry bearing No. KA-27/A-959, which came at a high speed in rash and negligent manner as its driver suddenly took his lorry towards the right side and hit the Car bearing No. KA-01/Z- 6950 and caused the accident. Due to the impact, the deceased sustained fatal injuries and thereafter succumbed to the same. It is the case of the appellants/claimants that the deceased was an agriculturist and also LIC agent, earning substantial income. On account of untimely death of the deceased, wife has lost her companion/husband, daughters have lost love and affection, inspiration and guidance of their father. Taking all these relevant aspects into consideration, they have filed claim petition before the Tribunal under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, claiming compensation against the appellant/Insurer and owner of the offending vehicle involved in the accident. 2. Taking all these relevant aspects into consideration, they have filed claim petition before the Tribunal under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, claiming compensation against the appellant/Insurer and owner of the offending vehicle involved in the accident. 2. The said matter had come up for consideration before the Tribunal. The Tribunal in turn after due appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence and other material available on record, has allowed the same in part by awarding Rs. 3,75,000/- towards loss of dependency, Rs. 20,000/- towards loss of consortium, Rs. 20,000/- towards loss of estate, Rs. 20,000/- towards loss of love and affection and Rs. 5,000/- towards funeral, transportation and other expenses, in all awarding compensation of Rs. 4,40,000/- with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till realization. Being dissatisfied with the impugned Judgment and Award passed by the Tribunal, the claimants and the Insurer felt necessitated to present these two appeals respectively. 3. We have heard the learned Counsel appearing for the claimants and learned Counsel for Insurer and perused the impugned common judgment and award passed by the Tribunal. 4. After careful consideration of the submission of learned Counsel appearing for the claimants and the Insurer, after perusal of the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal and after evaluation of oral and other documentary evidence available on record what emerges is that, the occurrence of the accident and resultant death of the deceased in the road traffic accident are not in dispute. The claimants are none other than wife and daughters of the deceased. The deceased was aged about 68 years, agriculturist and also LIC Agent. The Tribunal is justified in awarding Rs. 3,75,000/- towards loss of dependency and Rs. 65,000/- towards conventional heads as stated supra by assigning valid and cogent reasons after appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence available on record. Therefore, we do not find any justifiable grounds to grant the relief sought for either by the claimants or by the Insurer and the impugned Judgment and Award does not call for interference by this Court. Having regard to the facts and circumstances stated supra, both the appeals filed by the claimants and the Insurer are dismissed as devoid of merits. The amount deposited by the Insurer in M.F.A. No. 2723/2013 shall be transmitted to the jurisdictional Tribunal immediately. Having regard to the facts and circumstances stated supra, both the appeals filed by the claimants and the Insurer are dismissed as devoid of merits. The amount deposited by the Insurer in M.F.A. No. 2723/2013 shall be transmitted to the jurisdictional Tribunal immediately. Office is directed to send the LCR to the jurisdictional Tribunal immediately.