1.0 This appeal is directed against the judgement and award dated 23rd August 2005 passed by learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Main), Sabarkantha @ Himmatnagar in Motor Accident claim Petition No.817 of 1995 whereby the Triobunal has awarded a sum of Rs.4,04,000/ along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum.
2.0 On 24th April 1995 one Ashwinbhai and Pankajbhai Pravinbhai Patel were traveling to Demai on motorcycle. When they reached on BayadKapadvanj road in the sim of village Bayad, a truck bearing registration No.GJ9T7185 came on wrong side and dashed with the motor cycle. Ashwinbhai sustained serious injuries and succumbed to the same. Hence the legal heirs preferred the aforesaid claim petition claiming a compensation in the sum of Rs.4,50,000/. The Tribunal after hearing the parties passed the aforesaid award which is challenged in the present appeal.
3.0 Learned Advocate appearing for the appellant submitted that the learned Tribunal erred in coming to the conclusion that the vehicle was involved in the accident merely in view of contents of para 13 of the written statement. The said contention was an alternative contention and could not have been ignored in light of the specific contention qua non involvement of the truck. He further submitted that the evidence of pillion rider was totally unreliable.
4.0 While dealing with the matter the learned Tribunal has relied on the written statement filed by the Insurance Company at Exh.12 in para 13 at page No.5 wherein it is stated that as per the information received by the Insurance Company, opponent no.1 was driving his truck bearing registration No;.GJ9T7185 in slow speed, cautiously observing all the traffic rules but the deceased Ashwinbhai was driving the scooter in full speed and in rash and negligent manner and came on the wrong side and dashed with the truck and therefore the accident has occurred due to the sole negligence on the part of the deceased Ashwinkumar himself. Therefore even according to the Insurance Company they have admitted the involvement of the offending vehicle i.e. truck bearing registration No.GJ9T7185. Therefore the claimants have proved the involvement of the offending truck. However, driver of the offending vehicle has not entered into the witness box and he had fled away from the place of accident. Therefore the Tribunal has rightly drawn an adverse inference. Hence the contention of the appellant cannot be accepted.
5.0 As regards the quantum of the amount awarded by the Tribunal is concerned, there is no serious dispute about the same and in fact the appellant could not make out any submission assailing the judgement and award.
6.0 I am in complete agreement with the reasoning adopted and findings arrived at by the Tribunal. The appeal is therefore dismissed with no order as to costs.
(K.S.JHAVERI, J.) niru*