1. Both these appeals arise out of the common judgment and award dated 18.01.2002 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Aux.), Panchmahals at Godhra in M.A.C.P. No.1200/1993 & 1347/1993 whereby, both the claim petitions were partly allowed and the original claimants of M.A.C.P. No.1200/1993 were awarded total compensation of Rs.1,97,400/- along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of application till its realization as against the total claim of Rs.9.00 Lacs; and the original claimants of M.A.C.P. No.1347/1993 were awarded total compensation of Rs.1,16,600/- along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of application till its realization as against the total claim of Rs.4.00 Lacs. By way of these appeals, the appellants in both these appeals, original claimants, have prayed for enhancement of the amount of compensation.
2. The facts in brief are that on 29.04.1993 Ramgopal Agrawal and the appellant of F.A. No.2198/2002 were going to Dahod from Limkheda on the Scooter bearing registration No. GAM 5653, which was driven by Ramgopal Agrawal at the relevant time. At around 1530 hrs., a Truck bearing registration No. GJ-12-T-6302 driven by original opponent no.1 and owned by original opponent no.2, dashed the said Scooter. In the said accident, both Ramgopal Agrawal and the appellant of F.A. No.2198/2002 sustained severe injuries and subsequently, Ramgopal Agrawal died. The legal heirs of deceased and the injured filed claim petitions before the Tribunal, which came to be partly allowed by way of the impugned award. Being dissatisfied with the impugned award, the appellants have preferred the present appeal for enhancement.
3. Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned counsel for respondent-Insurance Company. Having gone through the impugned award, I find that the Tribunal has appreciated the evidence on record in its proper perspective and has awarded the compensation in question. Considering the facts of the case and the evidence on record, the compensation awarded is just, legal and appropriate and also in consonance with the prevailing law on the subject. I am in complete agreement with the reasonings given by and the conclusion arrived at by the Tribunal and hence, find no reasons to entertain the present appeals.
4. For the foregoing reasons, both the appeals are dismissed. No order as to costs.
[K.
S. JHAVERI, J.] Pravin/* Top