1. This is an appeal, whereby the appellant- insurance company has challenged the judgment and award of the M.A.C.T., Amreli(II), dated 20.01.1995, rendered in M.A.C.P. No.20 of 1986, whereby the tribunal awarded Rs.65,600/- along with 15 per cent interest.
2. The brief facts leading to the filing of the present appeal are that, on 16.01.1984, while respondent No.1, who was working as a cleaner in the truck driven by respondent No.3, owned by respondent No.2 and insured by the present appellant, same met with an accident. As a result thereof, respondent No.1 received severe bodily injuries. He, therefore, filed the aforesaid claim petition, wherein the tribunal passed the impugned award. Hence, the present appeal.
3. The learned Counsel for the appellant has raised various contentions. He submitted that the tribunal erred in passing the impugned judgment and award. The tribunal failed to appreciate the material on record in its true perspective. The tribunal erred in deducting amount towards 20 per cent negligence on the part of respondent No.1, though, it held that the claimant was negligence to the extent of 25 per cent. The amount awarded by the tribunal is highly exaggerated, and therefore, he has prayed to allow the present appeal.
4. On the other hand, learned Counsel for respondent No.2 has opposed the appeal and has prayed to dismiss the same as being without merit.
5. Heard learned Counsel for the appellant and respondent No.2 and perused the material on record.
6. To prove the factum of accident, respondent No.1 examined himself at Exhibit-32, wherein he stated that on the date of alleged accident, respondent No.3 was driving the truck in rash and negligent manner and on account of that the accident occurred. The case put forward by respondent No.1 is also supported by the evidence of one Kamabhai Bodarbhai(Exhibit-45). Respondent No.1 also produced documentary evidence to prove his case viz. FIR, Panchnama etc., the tribunal, hence, rightly come to the conclusion that respondent No.1 is entitled to claim compensation. Hence, the contention of the learned Counsel for the appellant with regard to factum of accident requires to be rejected. However, in view of the fact that respondent No.1 tried to enter into the cabin of the truck, while it was in motion, the tribunal rightly held that respondent No.1 was also negligent to the extent of 25 per cent.
7. As regards the contentions raised by the learned Counsel for the appellant with regard to the liability, amount awarded by the tribunal towards compensation etc. are concerned, the tribunal has elaborately discussed the evidence on record, oral as well as documentary, which support the case put forward by respondent No.1. I have also gone through the impugned judgment and I find that the compensation awarded by the tribunal is just and appropriate and in consonance with the evidence on record and the law on the subject.
8. Insofar as the aspect of negligence is concerned, it is apparent from the material on record that, though, tribunal itself came to the conclusion that respondent No.1 was also negligent to the extent of 25 per cent, it has deducted only 20 per cent amount towards the same. Hence, the contention of the learned Advocate for the appellant with regard to negligence requires to be accepted. The tribunal has awarded Rs.82,000/- towards compensation. Thus, after deducting 25 per cent negligence on the part of respondent No.1, the tribunal ought to have awarded Rs.(82,000 – 25%)=61,500/- towards compensation instead the tribunal has awarded Rs.65,600/- towards compensation. The appellant, hence, shall be entitled to a refund of Rs.(65,600 – 61,500)=4100/-.
9. The tribunal has awarded the original amount of award with 15 per cent interest, which appears to be on higher side, looking to the rate of interest prevailing at the relevant point of time. Hence, I am of the opinion that the ends of the justice would be met if the interest is awarded at 12 per cent in place of 15 per cent.
10. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed. Respondent No.1-original claimant shall be entitled to compensation of Rs.61,500/- along with TWELVE per cent interest, instead of 15 per cent, per annum from the date of application, till its realization. The appellant shall be refunded an amount of Rs.4100/- along with amount towards difference of 3 per cent interest lying in FDRs before the concerned tribunal. The judgment and award impugned in this appeal stands modified to the aforesaid extent. No order as to costs.
(K.S. JHAVERI,J.) Umesh/