1.0 This appeal is directed against the judgement and award dated 11.06.2004 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Aux.) and Fast Track Court No.2, Jamnagar, in Claim Case No. 294 of 1999 whereby the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.4,09,000/ along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing of the application within three months and in case of failure to deposit the said amount to pay 12% interest from the date of filing of the application till realization.
2.0 On 23.03.1999 the claimant along with his wife and children were traveling on scooter. At that time an S.T. Bus came from the opposite side and knocked them down as a result of which the claimant and others fell down, his wife and son died on the spot. The claimant and daughter sustained serious injuries. Claim Case No. 294 of 1999 is filed before the Tribunal in respect of death of wife of the claimant No.1 wherein the impugned award came to be filed.
3.0 Learned advocate for the appellant contended that the learned Tribunal ought to have held contributory negligence on the part of the claimant No.1.
4.0 Learned advocate for the appellant contended that the learned Tribunal erred in holding the monthly income of the deceased at Rs.3000/ per month on the basis of the income shown in the income tax return produced at Exh. 40; that the amount multiplier applied by the learned Tribunal is on higher side.
5.0 As a result of hearing and perusal of the record it is found that the Tribunal has discussed the issue with regard to negligence in issue nos.1, 2 and 3 wherein the Tribunal has considered FIR, Panchnama, etc. Having considered the entire evidence it was found that it is solely due to the negligence of the driver of the bus that the accident in question has occurred and the driver had run away from the spot. Learned Advocate for the appellant is not in a position to point out anything from the record to show that there was any negligence on the part of the deceased or the claimant.
6.0 As regards the quantum is concerned, the learned Tribunal after considering the evidence in detail has assessed the income of Rs. 3500/ per month. For loss of dependency the learned Tribunal has deducted 2/3rd towards persona living and expenses. 2/3rd of Rs. 3500/ would come to Rs. 2200/ per month and Rs. 26, 400/ per year. Looking to the age of the deceased the multiplier of 15 applied by the learned Tribunal is just and proper. The amount awarded under the other head is also just and proper.
7.0 Learned Advocate for the appellant is not in a position to point out anything from the record to take a different view in the matter.
8.0 I am in complete agreement with the reasoning adopted and findings arrived at by the Tribunal. No case is made out to cause interference. Hence the appeal is dismissed with no order as to cost.
(K.S.JHAVERI, J.) niru*