1. Heard learned advocates for the parties and perused the papers on record.
2. The appellant herein has challenged the award dated 27.10.1999 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Main), Ahmedabad (Rural) at Mirzapur in Motor Accident Claims Petition No. 1899 of 1991 so far as the Tribunal awarded only Rs. 2,59,000/- as compensation with interest at 12% per annum.
3. It is the case of the appellant that on 28.11.1991 while one Shri Maganji Chandaji after alighting from S.T. Bus, the original opponent no. 1 drove the bus bearing registration no. GJ-1 Z 893 in a rash and negligent manner thereby hitting him as a result of which he died. The appellants being the legal heirs and representatives of the deceased therefore filed claim petition to the tune of Rs. 8,00,000/-. The Tribunal after hearing the parties passed the aforesaid award.
4. Ms. Ashlesha Patel, learned advocate appearing for Ms. Bhatt 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 higher amount under various heads. She submitted that the Tribunal has wrongly assessed the contributory negligence on the part of the S.T. Bus driver at 70%
5. As a result of hearing and perusal of records, this court is of the view that considsering 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 to the extent of 70%. The Tribunal has considered the fact that as the accident happened while the deceased was crossing the road, the negligence was on both the sides the bus driver in particular and therefore contributory negligence of 70-30 was assessed qua the bus driver and the deceased. Nothing is pointed out before this Court to take a contrary view. The Tribunal has finally quantified the amount of compensation at Rs. 2,59,000/-. 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//