FA/1065/1988 1/4 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD FIRST APPEAL No. 1065 of 1988 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI ========================================================= 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? -Yes. 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? -No. 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ? -No. 4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ? -No. 5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ? -No. ========================================================= GUJARAT STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION - Appellant(s) Versus AHMED RAFIK ABDULLA PATHAN & 3 - Defendant(s) ========================================================= Appearance : MR HARDIK C RAWAL for Appellant(s) : 1, NOTICE SERVED for Defendant(s) : 1, 4, MR DARSHAN M PARIKH for Defendant(s) : 2, MS AMEE YAJNIK for Defendant(s) : 3, ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI Date : 15/05/2008 ORAL JUDGMENT 1. By way of this appeal, the appellant-Gujarat State Road FA/1065/1988 2/4 JUDGMENT Transport Corporation, original opponent no.4 has challenged the judgment and order dated 8/9/1987 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Auxiliary) Kheda at Nadiad in the Motor Accident Claim Application No.638 of 1984 whereby the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal has partly allowed the application and awarded the amount of compensation of Rs.1,07,420/- with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of the application till the date of realization with proportionate costs. 2. The facts in brief leading rise to filing of the appeal are as under: 2.1) On 12/8/1983 at about 21:00 hours, the claimant was driving his truck No.GTX 8637 after loading it and was going from Bombay to Gondal. That near Valsad S.T.Bus No.GRR 9350 came from opposite side and dashed against the truck as a result of which he has sustained injuries and hence he has filed claim petition bearing Motor Accident Claim Petition No.638 of 1984 before the Motor Accident Claim Tribunal (Auxiliary), Kheda at Nadiad and claimed Rs.1,50,000/- with 12% running interest together with costs of the suit. The bus was driven by the driver of the bus in a rash and negligent manner. FA/1065/1988 3/4 JUDGMENT 2.2) On completion of the pleadings, the Tribunal has awarded the compensation of Rs.1,07,420/- as stated above. Hence, this appeal. 3. The learned counsel for the appellant has contended that the Tribunal has erred in awarding the amount of compensation after considering the negligence of 60% on the part of S.T. Bus driver and 40% on the part of truck driver. 4. Heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the documents on record. The main contention raised by the appellant is with regard to the aspect of negligence. The Tribunal after discussing the same in para 8 of the judgment, has awarded the compensation after considering the negligence of 60% on the part of ST Bus driver. No other contention has been raised by the learned advocate for the appellant. 5. Considering the documentary evidence on record, I am of the view the the Tribunal has rightly awarded the amount of compensation. The amount of compensation is just and proper which requires to be approved. I am in complete agreement with the reasonings given by and the findings arrived at by the Tribunal and hence find no reasons to interfere in this appeal. Hence, the appeal deserves to be dismissed. FA/1065/1988 4/4 JUDGMENT 6. For the foregoing reasons, the appeal is dismissed. No order as to costs. (K.S.Jhaveri, J.) (ila)