NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED Vs. BAI SHANTABEN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These three appeals arising out of a common award rendered by Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Panchmahals, Godhra on 29.11.1985 are proposed to be disposed of by a common judgment inasmuch as common questions of law and fact are involved in these three appeals.

(2.) In First Appeal No. 636 of 1986, notice was served on respondent Nos. 1 to 6, 7 and 8. Mr. Maganbhai M. Desai filed appearance on behalf of the respondent Nos. 8/1 and 8/2 but today in spite of revision of list twice nobody appeared on behalf of these respondents. Similarly, in First Appeal No. 626 of 1986 appearance of Mr. J.C. Sheth is shown on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 and 2 and on behalf of the respondent Nos. 4/1 to 4/4 and 4/6 to 4/8 and Maganlal N. Desai respondent No. 3 has been deleted. None appears on behalf of these respondents and respondent Nos. 4 and 4/5. Mr. J.C. Sheth also did not appear despite revision of list twice. In First Appeal No. 627 of 1986, again Mr. J.C. Sheth and Mr. M.M. Desai did not appear though the list was revised twice. As such Mr. Rajni H. Mehta, the learned counsel for the appellant was heard and the record was perused.

(3.) As many as 24 motor accident claim petitions were filed under section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act claiming compensation for death of six persons and bodily injuries sustained by 18 persons in the accident which took place on 10.2.1982. These persons were travelling as. passengers in commercial vehicle, i.e., truck No. 3206. The said vehicle was being driven by opposite party No. 1 before the Tribunal. The vehicle was owned by opposite party respondent Nos. 2/1 to 2/5 and the opposite party No. 3 before the Tribunal is appellant before us, viz., the insurance company. These appeals arise out of an award of the Tribunal in MACT Case No. 182 of 1982 awarding compensation of Rs. 98,300, in MACT Case No. 184 of 1982 awarding compensation of Rs. 25,500 and in the MACT Case No. 348 of 1982 awarding compensation of Rs. 78,800 and the amount has been made payable jointly and severally by all the opposite parties. Mr. Mehta informed that 24 persons were travelling in the said truck with the goods out of which 6 persons were labourers and 18 persons were either owners of the goods being carried in the aforesaid truck or other persons. He further informed that only these three appeals survive and other appeals have already been disposed of on one ground or the other.