1.0 This appeal is directed against the judgement and award dated 04.02.1998 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal ( Special), Porbandar wherein the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.34100/ to the claimant along with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of application till realization.
2.0 On 16.10.1993 the appellantoriginal claimant was travelling from Odadar to Porbandar in the rickshaw No. GTP 8536 of the ownership of opponent No.1 and insured with opponent No.2. When he reached near the Birla Factory, he tried to overtake one Ambassador car and at that time his leg which was kept outside came between the rickshaw and ambassador car because of which the appellantclaimant sustained serious injuries. He therefore, filed the aforesaid claim petition wherein the aforesaid award came to be passed. This appeal is at the instance of the claimant for enhancement of compensation.
3.0 Learned advocate for the appellant contended that learned Tribunal has committed error in holding that the claimant is negligent to the extent of 50%. He submitted that the claimant has not intentionally sustained injuries and therefore, it cannot be said that there is contributory negligence. He further submitted that the amount awarded by the learned Tribunal is on lower side.
4.0 Learned advocate for the respondent supported the judgement and award of the learned Tribunal and submitted that the claimant himself in the F.I.R stated that he was sitting on left side of the rickshaw by keeping his leg outside and at that time when it overtook, left side was dashed and therefore,he received injuries on the right leg.
5.0 Heard learned advocates for the parties and perused the documents on record. In the F.I.R , the claimant himself has stated that he was sitting on left side of the rickshaw by keeping his leg outside and at that time when he tried to overtake, left side was dashed and therefore,he received injuries on the right leg. Thus it is very clear that the claimant sustained injuries because of the accident. From the F.I.R, it is very clear that the claimant has kept his leg outside. Though the claimant was driver, he kept his leg outside and when he tried to overtake the ambassador, his leg came between the rickshaw and ambassador. In those circumstances, the learned Tribunal has rightly held that the claimant is negligent to the extent of 50%.
6.0 As regards the amount of compensation, the learned Tribunal after considering in detail has rightly awarded the amount towards the different heads.
7.0 I am in complete agreement with the reasoning adopted and findings arrived at by the Tribunal The learned Advocate for the appellant could not assail the judgement and award or to persuade this Court to take a different view of the matter. The first appeal is therefore dismissed with no order as to costs.
niru* (K.S.JHAVERI, J.)