SATISHKUMAR MOHANBHAI PARMAR Vs. RAVJIBHAI CHANDUBHAI RAVAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants who are the parents of deceased Satishkumar are not happy with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal vide judgment and award dated 30.6.2009 passed by MACT (aux), Nadiad in MACP 124/05 and therefore, they have preferred the present appeal under section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short "the M.V. Act") for enhancement of compensation.

(2.) The deceased Satish kumar and his two other friends were going to Anand from Petlad in a Maruti Esteem car bearing registration GJ 2A 8089 on 6.11.2002. Their car met with an accident with a Matator bearing registration No. GJ1AS9424. The deceased Satishkumar sustained serious injuries. He was admitted to SSG hospital, Vadodara where he had died during the treatment. The appellants filed MACP No. 124/05 to recover compensation of Rs 8 lakhs from the respondents at the time of accident. The offending Matador was of the ownership of the respondent no.1 while the Esteem car in which the deceased was driving was of the ownership of respondent no. 3. Both these vehicles were insured with the National Insurance Company Ltd, respondents no. 2 and 4 herein. The Tribunal by impugned judgment and award partly allowed the claim petition and exonerated respondents no. 3 and 4 herein and directed respondents nos. 1 and 2 to pay a sum of Rs 1,45,000/- with 9% interest to the appellants. The appellants are not happy with the quantum of compensation and therefore, they were seeking enhancement in this appeal.

(3.) I have heard Mr. J.A Adeshra, learned advocate for the appellant and Mr. V.C Thomas learned advocate appearing on behalf of Mr. Vibhuti Nanavati, learned advocate for the respondents Insurance Company. There is no representation on behalf of the other respondents despite service of notice in appeal.