JUDGMENT : P.K. LOHRA, J. The instant appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short, ‘Act’) is filed by appellants seeking enhancement of compensation quantified and awarded by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Banswara (for short, ‘learned Tribunal’) while deciding MAC Case No. 196/2017. Learned Tribunal, upon adjudication of the claim of appellants under Section 166 of the Act, quantified and awarded compensation to the tune of Rs. 2,62,000/- on account of death of their father Kanti Lal Jain in a road accident. 2. I have heard learned counsel for the appellants, perused the impugned award and also perused evidence tendered by appellants, which was brought to my notice by learned counsel for the appellants. 3. It is not in dispute that at the time of death, Kanti Lal Jain was 60 years old and before the learned Tribunal no concrete proof was furnished about his monthly income. 4. All the respondents-claimants are major and one of the claimant Alkesh Kumar has laid a separate claim for seeking compensation on account of injuries suffered by him in arising out of the same road accident. It is brought to my notice by learned counsel that the amount quantified and awarded by learned Tribunal to Alkesh Kumar is also pending consideration in S.B Civil Misc. Appeal No. 2906/2017 with prayer for enhancement. 5. Be that as it may, the fact remains that the affidavit tendered on behalf of appellants and its cross-examination sufficiently proves that both father and son were sitting on a grocery shop but no requisite proof is furnished. Looking to the age of deceased and the fact that all the claimants, sons and daughter of the deceased are major, in my considered opinion, learned Tribunal has not committed any error in assessing the amount of compensation and applying the multiplier in relation to age. The compensation determined by the learned Tribunal in the backdrop of facts and circumstances is just and reasonable and no case for enhancement is made out. 6. Consequently, I feel dissuaded to interfere with the impugned award, and therefore, appeal fails and the same is hereby dismissed. 7. It is made clear that dismissal of this appeal shall have no ramification on the pending appeal laid by one of the appellant Alkesh Kumar.