1. These crossappeals have been preferred against the judgment and award dated 30.05.2002 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal [Main], Surendranagar in M.A.C.P. No.25/1995 whereby, the claim petition was partly allowed and the original claimant (Respondent no.1 in F.A. No.2388/2004 and the Appellant in F.A. No.2574/2005) was awarded total compensation of Rs.3,36,912/ along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of application till its realization.
2. The facts in brief are that on 03.09.1994 at around 0600 hrs. while the original claimant was driving his Truck bearing No. GJ11T8585, a S.T. Bus bearing registration No. GJ1Z3359 belonging to appellantCorporation, dashed with the Tuck. In the said accident, the original claimant sustained severe bodily injuries and was taken to a nearby Hospital for necessary treatment. He, therefore, filed claim petition before the Tribunal claiming total compensation of Rs.1,50,000/. The said claim petition came to be partly allowed by way of the impugned award. Against the said award, the opponentCorporation and the original claimant have preferred the present crossappeals.
3. Heard learned counsel for the respective parties. The learned counsel for the appellant Corporation has contended that the Tribunal erred in apportioning ratio of contributory negligence at 70 : 30 between the driver of the Truck and S.T. Corporation. From the record, it appears that at the time of accident the driver of the Truck came from the opposite direction on the wrong side and dashed with the S.T. Bus. Thus, both the drivers have not taken proper care and caution in driving their respective vehicles and therefore, both were responsible for the accident in question. Therefore, the ratio of contributory negligence of 70 : 30 attributed by the Tribunal is just and appropriate. Hence, I agree with the findings recorded by the Tribunal regarding contributory negligence and find no reasons to disturb the same.
4. The learned counsel for the original claimant has submitted that the amount awarded by the Tribunal under different heads is on the lower side. However, having gone through the impugned award, I find that the compensation awarded under the respective heads are just and appropriate and 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, both the appeals are dismissed. No order as to costs.
[K.S. JHAVERI, J.] /phalguni/