JUDGMENT : M.S. SONAK, J. 1. None for the appellant though the matter was duly notified on the cause list. 2. In the case of this very appellant, the Division Bench of this Court in I.C.I.C.I. Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd. Amravati vs. Surekha W/o Prakash Ghurde and Others, (2020) 2 Bom. C.R. 465, has held that in an appeal at the instance of the insurance company questioning the quantum of compensation is not maintainable in the absence of permission under Section 170(b) of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988. 3. On perusal of the grounds in the memo of appeal, it is clear that the appellant-insurance company is questioning the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal in its impugned award dated 04.10.2013. Mr. Godinho, learned counsel for the claimants points out that no leave under Section 170(b) of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 was obtained by the insurance company. 4. Therefore, following the law laid down by the Division bench of this Court in I.C.I.C.I. Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd. case (supra), this appeal is hereby dismissed. 5. The dismissal of this appeal will not come in the way of the appellant-Insurance Company from instituting any other proceedings, if maintainable in law. 6. If any amount is deposited by the appellant-insurance company, the claimants will be entitled to withdraw the same after four weeks from today together with interest if any that may have accrued thereon. This is subject to the appellant-insurance company, in the meanwhile, securing any restraint orders. 7. The claimants will have to furnish necessary identification and bank details so that the Registry can directly deposit the amounts into the respective bank accounts of the claimants. 8. This appeal is accordingly disposed of.