(1.) Heard learned advocate Mr. Mehul Sharad Shah appearing on behalf of appellant.
(2.) THE appellant has challenged common award passed by MACT, Jamnagar in respect of MACP No. 435 of 2001 and 486 of 2001 dated 27th February 2009. The Claims Tribunal has awarded Rs. 9,81,700/- in MACP No. 435 of 2001 and Rs. 2,67,400/- in MACP No. 486 of 2001. The appellant is Insurance Company of utility jeep No. GJ-2x-1391. In respect of negligent, claims tribunal has come to conclusion that driver of utility jeep is 15% negligent, therefore, liability of appellant insurance company is only 15% and 85% negligence is decided of driver of passenger vehicle Tata Tempo No. GJ-2t-8455 and its insurance company is Oriental Insurance Company. The driver of utility jeep expired in this accident. These two appeals are against award of two persons those who were travelling in jeep died in accident.
(3.) The first contention raised by learned advocate Mr. Shah is that there were enough evidence on record of claimant as well as witnesses to prove facts that accident occurred due to sole negligence of tempo driver. He read over evidence of claimant before this Court which suggests that driver of tempo was solely negligence and there was no negligence of driver of utility jeep. On that basis, submission was made that claims tribunal has committed gross error in coming to conclusion that driver of utility jeep is 15% responsible.