1. Heard learned advocates for the parties and perused the papers on record.
2. The appellant herein has challenged the award dated 05.12.2000 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal at Ahmedabad in Motor Accident Claims Petition No. 1122 of 1996 so far as the Tribunal dismissed the claim petition.
3. It is the case of the appellant that on 26.12.1995 while Ms. Nipaben Modi the appellant was travelling alighting from AMTS Bus bearing registration no. GTE 5111, she sustained injuries on various parts of the body and succumbed to those injuries during treatment. The appellants therefore filed claim petition to the tune of Rs. 4,00,000/-. The Tribunal after hearing the parties passed the aforesaid award.
4. Mr. Prajapati, 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 dismissing the claim petition. He submitted that the Tribunal has erred in coming to the conclusion that the death of the appellant's daughter did not happen due to the negligent driving of the bus driver.
5. Mr. Munshaw, learned advocate appearing for the respondent supported the award of the Tribunal and submitted that the accident happened due to the entire negligence of the deceased and therefore no negligence can be attributed on the respondent. He has drawn the attention of this Court to the panchnama and the complaint and the evidence of witnesses and submitted that no interference is called for in the appeal.
6. 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 accident did not occur at the place as averred in the petition but it has occurred 50 mts away from the bus stand. The appellant no. 1 had not stated name of the said eye witness Rafik Sheikh and he happens to be a chance witness. Even the physical fact of blood lying on the road 50 mt away disproves the case of the appellants and fully supports of the case of the opponent. Nothing is pointed out before this Court to take a contrary view. 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.
7. In the premises aforesaid, appeal is dismissed. No costs.
(K.S. JHAVERI, J.) Divya//