1. Heard learned advocates for the parties and perused the papers on record.
2. The appellants herein have challenged the award dated 31.08.2001 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal Porbandar in Motor Accident Claims Petition No. 30 to 33 of 1999 so far as the Tribunal directed the original opponents to jointly pay compensation with interest and proportionate costs.
3. It is the case of the appellants that on 27.04.1996 while the appellants were travelling in an Ambassador Car bearing registration no. GUU 9207 from Rajkot to Ahmedabad, a matador bearing registration no. GJ-3-U-7090 being driven by the original opponent no. 5 in a rash and negligent manner dashed with the car as a result of which one Shri Jeraj Patel died and others sustained injuries on various parts of the body. The appellants therefore filed claim petition seeking compensation. The Tribunal after hearing the parties passed the aforesaid award.
4. Mr. Paul, learned advocate appearing for the appellants submitted that the Tribunal failed to take into consideration the entire facts of the case and evidence on record and thereby erred in awarding adequate amount under various heads. He submitted that the Tribunal has wrongly assessed the contributory negligence of the driver of the ambassador car and therefore the same is required to be corrected as the driver of the matador was solely negligent for the said accident. Mr. Paul further submitted that even the quantum of compensation awarded is on lower side and the same is required to be enhanced.
5. As a result of hearing and perusal of records, this court is of the view that considering the evidence on record and the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal came to the conclusion that the appellants sustained injuries and one passenger died as a result of the rash and negligent driving of the original opponents no. 1 & 5. The Tribunal has assessed the contributory negligence of the driver of ambassador and driver of matador as 40%-60% after considering the FIR, Panchnama and the deposition of driver of ambassador car at Ex. 48. Nothing is pointed out before this Court to take a contrary view. The Tribunal has finally quantified the amount of compensation in each case which is just and proper and does not call for any interference. This court is in complete agreement with the reasonings adopted and findings arrived at by the Tribunal and therefore do not see any reason for causing interference.
6. In the premises aforesaid, appeals are dismissed. No costs.
(K.S. JHAVERI, J.) Divya//