1. As common question of law and facts arise in these First Appeal as well as Civil Revision Application and they arise out of the common Judgement and Award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Main), Rajkot, the First Appeal as well as the Civil Revision Application both are heard, decided and disposed of by this common Judgement and order.
2. First Appeal No. 2388 of 1993 has been preferred by the appellant herein – original opponent No.5 – Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation challenging the impugned Judgement and Award dtd.17/2/1993 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Main), Rajkot in Motor Accident Claim Petition No. 665 of 1988, by which the learned tribunal has partly allowed the said claim petition by holding that the original claimant is entitled to recovery a sum of Rs.28,900/- with interest at the rate of 12% per annum towards the compensation from the appellant and others.
Civil Revision Application No. 1559 of 1993 has been preferred by the petitioner herein – original applicant No.5 – Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation to quash and set aside the impugned Judgement and Award dtd.17/2/1993 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Main), Rajkot in Motor Accident Claim Petition No. 300 of 1989 dismissing the claim petition filed by the petitioner -GSRTC for damage of Rs.9999 to the ST Bus of the original applicant.
3. At the outset, it is required to be noted that the learned advocate appearing on behalf of the appellant/petitioner - Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation has stated at the bar that present First Appeal as well as Civil Revision Application are filed solely on the ground of contributory negligence and against the finding given by the learned tribunal holding that the driver of the ST Bus of the Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation is fully negligent for the vehicular accident in question. However, the learned advocate appearing on behalf of the appellant / petitioner -GSRTC is not in a position to satisfy this Court as to how the finding given by the learned tribunal holding the driver of the Bus of the Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation fully negligent, is perverse and/or contrary to the evidence on record. Even otherwise, considering the evidence on record and the finding given by the learned tribunal and the fact that it is found on appreciation of evidence that the ST Bus was proceeding in excessive speed and because of the accident, the Rickshaw turned turtled, it cannot be said that the learned tribunal has committed any error and/or illegality in holding the driver of the ST Bus fully negligent for the accident in question. While doing so the learned tribunal has also relied upon the documentary evidence such as Panchnama of the place of accident etc. The said finding recorded by the learned tribunal is on appreciation of evidence, which is not required to be interfered with by this Court.
4. Under the circumstances and considering the facts and circumstances, First Appeal as well as Civil Revision Application deserve to be dismissed and are accordingly dismissed. Rule is discharged in Civil Revision Application No. 1559 of 1993. However, in the facts and circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs.
[M.R. SHAH, J.] rafik