1. Heard learned advocates for the parties and perused the papers on record.
2. The appellants herein have challenged the award dated 09.02.1999 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Aux), Kutch at Bhuj in Motor Accident Claims Petition No. 288 of 1991 so far as the Tribunal awarded only Rs. 4,68,000/- as compensation with interest at 15% per annum.
3. It is the case of the appellants that on 21.04.1991 while one Bharatkumar Parekh was riding his scooter bearing registration no. GJX 4501, a truck bearing registration no. GTY 5581 being driven by the original opponent no. 1 in a rash and negligent manner hit the scooter of Shri Bharatkumar as a result of which the appellant sustained injuries on various parts of the body. He succumbed to those injuries. The appellants being legal heirs and representatives of the deceased therefore filed claim petition to the tune of Rs. 7,50,000/-. The Tribunal after hearing the parties passed the aforesaid award.
4. Mr. Shah, learned advocate appearing for the appellant submitted that the Tribunal failed to take into consideration the entire facts of the case and evidence on record and thereby erred in awarding adequate amount under various heads. He submitted that the Tribunal has wrongly assessed the income of the appellant.
5. As a result of hearing and perusal of records, this court is of the view that considering the evidence on record and the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal came to the conclusion that the appellant sustained injuries as a result of the rash and negligent driving of the original opponent no.
1. The Tribunal has assessed the disability of the whole body at 11%. The Tribunal also assessed the monthly income of the appellant at Rs. 2500/- and Rs. 3750/-. Nothing is pointed out before this Court to take a contrary view. The Tribunal has finally quantified the amount of compensation at Rs. 4,68,000/-. The Tribunal has in paras 9, 10 & 11 given detailed reasons for the same. This court is in complete agreement with the reasonings adopted and findings arrived at by the Tribunal and therefore do not see any reason for causing interference.
6. In the premises aforesaid, appeal is dismissed. No costs.
(K.S. JHAVERI, J.) Divya//