1. By way of this appeal, the appellants have challenged the judgment and award dated 30.07.2011, passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal(Auxi.), Gandhidham-Kutch, in M.A.C.P. No.980 of 1999, whereby the tribunal has awarded compensation in the sum of Rs. 8,57,500/- to the claimants along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till realization.
2. The brief facts leading to filing of this appeal are that on 31.01.1997, one Chandrakant Shantilal Shah, deceased alongwith one Shaileshkumar Champaklal Gandhi were going towards Bhachau in a Maruti 800 Car bearing registration No.GJ-12-C-9761, at that time one truck bearing registrtion No.GQY 6073 came from opposite side and dashed the Maruti car. As a result of the said accident Chandrakant Shantilal Shah died on the spot. Therefore, the legal heirs of the deceased filed claim petition being M.A.C.P. No. 980 of 1999 before the Tribunal for compensation. The Tribunal after hearing learned advocates for both the parties and after recording the evidence decided the claim petition and passed the award as stated herein above against which the present appeal is filed by the appellants.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant contended that the tribunal erred in passing the impugned judgment and award. The tribunal failed to appreciate the material on record in its true perspective. He further contended that the Tribunal has committed an error in awarding other allwances. In support of his contention, she relied upon the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Sunil Sharma Vs. Bachitar Singh, reported in 2011(0)49703, in the case of Raghuvir Singh Matolya Vs. Hari Singh Malviya, reported in 2009(0) GLHEL SC 43170 and in the case of National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Indira Srivastava, reported in 2007(0) GLHEL SC 40215.
4. Learned counsel for the respondents supported the impugned judgement and award of the Tribunal and submitted that the Tribunal after considering the evidence on record has passed the impugned judgment and award. Therefore, he prayed to dismissed this appeal.
5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record. As regards the contentions raised by the learned Counsel for the appellant with regard to the amounts awarded by the Tribunal under different heads are concerned, I have gone through the impugned award and 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. Further the decision relied upon by the learned advocate for the appellant will not apply in the facts of the present case as in this case income was not proved, which is not the case in the decisions relied upon by learned counsel for the appellant. Therefore, 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.
6. In the result, this appeal is dismissed. No order as to costs.
[K.S.
JHAVERI,J.] pawan Top