1. Both these appeals arise out of the same accident and involve common questions on law and facts. Hence, they are disposed of by this common judgment.
2. Both these appeals arise out of the common judgment and award dated 15.09.2004 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Aux.), Kheda at Nadiad in M.A.C.P. No.343/1997 and 342/1997 whereby, both the claim petitions were allowed in part.
3. The aforesaid claim petitions were preferred in connection with the vehicular accident that took place on 30.12.1996 involving an ST Bus bearing registration No.GJ-18-V-455 and a Truck bearing registration No. GJ-7-X-3601.
4. Heard learned counsel for the respective parties. Having gone through the impugned award, I find that the Tribunal has dealt with every aspect of the case in detail. The Tribunal appreciated the evidence on record in its proper perspective and has awarded compensation, which, in my view, is just, legal and appropriate. Considering the damage caused to the Truck and the panchnama of scene of accident Exhibit-38, I am of the view that the Tribunal has rightly held the Truck driver solely negligent for the accident.
5. Learned counsel for the appellant was not in a position to point out from the impugned award as to where the Tribunal has committed any illegality or impropriety while deciding the claim petition. I am in complete agreement with the reasonings given by the Tribunal in its award and hence, find no reasons to entertain the appeals.
6. For the foregoing reasons, both the appeals are dismissed. No order as to costs.
[K.
S. JHAVERI, J.] Pravin/* Top