1. The appellant-Corporation has preferred the present appeal against the judgment and award dated 31.01.1992 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Junagadh in M.A.C.P. No.20/1985 whereby, the claim petition was allowed in part and the respondent, original claimant, was awarded total compensation of Rs.1,55,000/- along with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of application till its realization with proportionate costs.
2. The aforesaid claim petition was preferred in connection with the vehicular accident which took place on 03.07.1984 involving an ST Bus bearing registration No. GRD 6061. In the said accident, the deceased sustained severe bodily injuries and died, therefore, the original claimants filed claim petition claiming total compensation of Rs.2.00 Lacs.
3. The appellant-Corporation has challenged the impugned award mainly on the grounds that the Tribunal has erred in deciding the issues regarding negligence and compensation awarded under the head of dependency. It is also submitted that the rate of interest awarded by the Tribunal is on the higher side and deserves to be reduced.
4. Heard learned counsel for the respective parties. After considering the evidence on record in the form of panchnama of the scene of accident, the FIR and the oral evidence of witnesses i.e. Lalchand Vasudev at Exh.100, Yusuf Abdulla at Exh.219, Abdul Satar Allarakha at Exh.220, Gokaldas Pragji at Exh.287, Sureshkumar Lalji Tank at Exh.396 and Mahmad Kalu at Exh.412, the Tribunal concluded that the accident occurred on account of the sole negligence of the ST bus driver. In my opinion, while recording such finding, the Tribunal has appreciated the evidence on record in its proper perspective and has rightly held the ST bus driver solely negligent for the accident. Having gone through the impugned award, I find that the compensation awarded under the respective heads are just and appropriate and also in consonance with the evidence on record and the law on the subject. I am in complete agreement with the reasonings given by and the conclusion arrived at by the Tribunal and hence, I find no reasons to entertain the present appeal.
5. For the foregoing reasons, the appeal as well as the cross objection are dismissed. No order as to costs.
..mitesh..
[K. S. JHAVERI, J.]