SOMARAM HIRALAL MEGHWAL Vs. DIPSINH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ADMIT . Mr.Sanjay Suthar, learned advocate waives service of notice of admission on behalf of respondent no.1. Ms.Rahevar, learned advocate waives service of notice of admission on behalf of respondent no.2. With the consent of the learned advocates, the appeal is finally decided as legal point involved in this appeal is covered by the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Kasumben Vipinchandra Shah v/s. Arvindbhai Narmadashankar Raval reported in 2007 (1) GLH 601.

(2.) BY this appeal, the appellant ­ original claimants are challenging the judgment and award dated 12.08.2011 passed by the learned M.A.C.Tribunal (Auxi.), Kheda at Nadiad in M.A.C.P.No.230 of 2007.

(3.) 01.2000 at about 2.00 in the mid night between Jeep No.RJ ­ 24 T 817 and one unknown truck and in the said accident, the deceased Somaram Meghwal who was travelling as passenger in the jeep received serious injuries and succumbed to injuries. Hence claim petition was filed by the legal heirs of the deceased for getting compensation of Rs.5,00,000/ under section 163(A) of the Motor Vehicle Act. After recording evidence, Tribunal came to the conclusion that driver of the truck was 30% negligent and driver of the jeep was 70% negligent for the accident and held that claimants are entitled to get compensation of Rs.2,92,250/ (i.e. 70% negligent of driver of the jeep) with running interest of 7.5 % per annum from the date of claim petition and did not award Rs.1,25,250/ (i.e. 30% negligent of driver of the truck) as driver, owner and insurance company of the truck were not joined as party. 4. It is submitted by learned advocate for the appellant ­ original claimants that Tribunal has not properly appreciated documentary and oral evidence adduced by the appellant. It is also submitted that it is a case of composite negligence. He has relied on the decision of this Court in the case of Kasumben Vipinchandra Shah (supra). Therefore, it is requested to allow this appeal.