KANTABAI Vs. AHMED KHAN CHAND KHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS group of Appeals, involve common questions of law and fact, and therefore are heard and decided by this common judgment. A) MACP. No. 221 of 1991, was filed by one Kantabai Wd/o sureschandra Doshi and others 4, against Ahmed Khan s/o Chand Khan, deceased through Legal heirs and National Insurance Company Ltd. This MACP. No. 221 of 1991 was filed for compensation to the tune of Rs. 5,00,000/ -. In this macp No. 221/1991, it was alleged that one Sureshchandra Doshi sustained injuries in vehicular accident and died. The learned Tribunal has awarded an amount of Rs. 3,00,000/- towards compensation along with interest @ 12% p. a. by judgment and award dated 13-1-1999. This judgment and award passed in macp. No. 221/1991, is challenged by filing First Appeal No. 312/2000 for enhancement of the amount of compensation. B) MACP No. 220/1991 was filed by one Smt. Pramodini wd/o subhashchand Kasliwal and 4 others against legal heirs of deceased Ahmed khan s/o Chand Khan and National Insurance Company Ltd. for compensation to the extent of Rs. 3,00,000/ -. This was also a claim arising out of vehicular accidental death of Subhashchand Kasliwal. The learned Tribunal awarded an amount of Rs. 2,35,000/- towards compensation along with interest @12% p. a. This judgment and award is challenged by filing First Appeal No. 313 of 2000 by the original claimants, for enhancement in amount of compensation. C) MACP No. 223 of 1991, was filed by one Ms. Preeti alias Doly sureshchandra Doshi against legal heirs of deceased Ahmed Khan s/o Chand khan and the National Insurance Company Ltd. for compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/ -. It was a personal injury claim of Ms. Preeti. The learned Tribunal awarded an amount of Rs. 75,000/- along with 12% interest towards compensation in this MACP No. 223 of 1991. This judgment and order passed by the learned Tribunal is challenged by the original claimants by filing First Appeal no. 314 of 2000 in this High Court, for enhancement in the amount of compensation. D) MACP. No. 222 of 1991, was filed by one Smt. Kanta wd/o sureshchandra Doshi against legal heirs of deceased Ahmed Khan s/o Chand khan and National Insurance Company Ltd. for compensation to the tune of Rs. 1,00,000/ -. It was also a personal injury claim. The learned Tribunal awarded an amount of Rs. 75,000/- along with interest @ 12% p. a. This order is challenged by filing First Appeal No. 314 of 2000 by the original claimant Smt. Kantabai wd/o Sureshchandra Doshi; for enhancement in amount of compensation. E) MACP No. 219/1991 was filed by one Smt. Pramodini Wd/o subhashchand Kasliwal against legal heirs of deceased Ahmed Khan Chand khan to the extent of Rs. 2,00,000/- towards compensation. It was a personal injury claim. The learned Tribunal awarded Rs. 1,00,000/- towards compensation along with 12% interest p. a. in favour of the original Claimants. This award is challenged by the original claimant by filing First Appeal No. 316 of 2000 in this high Court. MACP. Nos. 219 of 1991, 220/1991, 221/1991, 222/1991 and 223/1991, were decided by common judgment by the learned Member, Motor accident Claims Tribunal at Dhule. As noted above, these original Claimants, have filed First Appeal Nos. 312/2000, 313/2000, 314/2000, 315/2000 and 316/2000 in this High Court, for enhancement in the amount of compensation. Undisputedly, the original opponents either legal heirs of deceased Ahmed Khan s/o Chand Khan or the National Insurance Company Ltd. , have not filed the appeals challenging any part of the order passed by the learned Tribunal in all these MAC petitions. The original opponents have also not filed cross-objections in this First Appeal Nos. 312/2000, 313/2000, 314/2000, 315/2000 and 316/2000.

(2.) BACKGROUND facts in nut shell may summarised as follows :

(3.) I have heard the learned counsel Mr. P. F. Patni for the appellants, the learned counsel Mr. A. A. Joshi instructed by Mr. K M. Loya for the respondent no. 1a to 1c and the learned counsel Mr. D. V. Soman for the respondent No. 2 in all these appeals. Undisputedly, Insured or the owner of the vehicle-legal heirs of Ahmed Khan s/o Chand Khan, did not file any appeal in this High Court, challenging any part of the award passed by the trial Court in all these claim petitions filed by the respective appellants. The Insurer or the Original owner of the vehicle namely Ahmed Khan s/o Chand Khan, or his legal heirs did not file any cross-objection in all these First Appeal Nos. 312/2000 to 316/2000. In this view of the matter, scope of these appeals, is limited, to the extent of enhancement of the amount of compensation as claimed by the appellants and apportionment regarding the amount of compensation inter-se between the respondent No. 1 and 2 before this Court, who are legal heirs of owner of the vehicle.