[1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR JUDGMENT S.B. CIVIL MISC. APPEAL NO. 1081/2008 UTTER PRADESH STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION Vs. JITENDRA & ANR. Date: 24.03.2008. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S. RATHORE Mr. Pankaj Gupta for the non-claimant/appellant. **** The non-claimant/appellant has preferred the present civil misc. appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 against the impugned judgment/Award dated 12.06.2007 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Rajgarh, District Alwar (for short 'the Tribunal') in Claim Case No. 49/2004, by which the claim petition filed by the claimant/appellant Jitendra has been partly allowed and the liability of compensation has been saddled upon the appellant. Brief facts of the present appeal are that on 04.03.2004 the claimant/respondent filed a claim petition before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Rajgarh, District Alwar under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 against the appellant and respondent No.2 claiming compensation on account of death of his father who was 65 years old in the accident which took place on 05.11.2003 due to rash and negligence of the [2] respondent No.2 who was driver of the bus belonging to Uttar Pradesh Road Transport Corporation bearing No. UP-80/Y-9768. The Tribunal vide its impugned Award dated 12.06.2007 awarded compensation to the tune of Rs. 1,34,180/- in favour of the claimant/respondent. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned Award dated 12.06.2007 passed by the Tribunal, the appellant has preferred the instant appeal on the ground that the Tribunal has utterly failed not to appreciate the averments made on behalf of the appellant that the driver of the maruti car had slept and due to this reason the car came in wrong side and collided with the bus of the Corporation and thus, there was no negligence on the part of the driver of the bus and as such no liability can be saddled upon the appellant for compensation. The impugned Award has further been challenged on the ground that the Tribunal has passed the award on higher side as the deceased was 65 years of age at the time of death and the claimant/respondent being his major son, is only entitled for the loss of love and affection and has no right for the income and only wife of the deceased could be entitled for such compensation, but the claimant/respondent being 25 years of age, is not legally entitled for such compensation and [3] the Award passed by the Tribunal is contrary to the settled preposition of law. I have heard learned counsel for the appellant and carefully gone through the impugned Award dated 12.06.2007 passed by the Tribunal. The Tribunal having considered the age and earning of the deceased has rightly awarded a compensation to the tune of Rs. 1,34,180 vide its impugned Award dated 12.06.2007 and has rightly arrived at a conclusion that the driver of the bus was negligent and on account of his negligence the accident took place. Therefore, looking to the age and earning of the deceased, the compensation to the tune of Rs. 1,34,180/- awarded by the Tribunal in favour of the claimant/respondent cannot said to be on higher side and in the considered view of this Court, the award passed by the Tribunal is just and reasonable and the same requires no interference by this Court. Consequently, the civil misc. appeal fails being devoid of merit and the same is hereby dismissed. The stay application also stands dismissed. (K.S. RATHORE)J. /KKC/