5. A Cross Objection has been filed by one of the claimants in MCOP No.84 of 2013, which has been numbered as Cros Obj. No.75 of 2016 seeking for enhancement of compensation. There are several discrepancies/inconsistencies as pointed out by the learned counsel for the appellant in the claim petition. In the claim petition, the age of the deceased is mentioned as 70 years, the age of the wife is mentioned as 65 years, the age of the son is mentioned as 59 years and the age of the daughter is mentioned as 61 years. When the age of the deceased, as pleaded in the claim petition, is 70 years, it is not possible for the son to be aged 59 years and the daughter to be aged 61 years. Before the Tribunal, the cross objector has also not filed any documents to prove that the deceased was aged 70 years. Therefore, this Court is of the considered view that, since the compensation awarded by the tribunal under the respective awards is a just compensation in view of the fact that there are several discrepancies / inconsistencies in the pleadings of the claimant in MCOP No.84/13, there is no merit in the Cros Obj. No.75 of 2016 also.
