JUDGMENT

M. S. Sonak, J. - Heard Mr. S.S. Kakodkar, learned Counsel for the appellant in both these appeals, and Ms. Megha Salkar, learned Counsel for respondent no.2 (Insurance Company) in both these appeals.

2. Since both appeals arise out of Claim Petitions concerning the accident on 27.10.2013 at 20.40 hours at Margao, it is only appropriate that a common judgment and order dispose of them.

3. The appeals challenge two separate awards made by the Motor accident Claims Tribunal dismissing the Claim Petition on a finding that the claimants failed to prove that the accident in which they suffered injuries was caused on account of rashness and negligence on the part of Mr. anil Shinde (respondent no.1) - the driver of Etios Toyota bearing registration no.Ga-08-F-8962. The Tribunal did not bother to answer the second issue about compensation.

4. Now, in several cases decided by this Court as also the Hon'ble Supreme Court, it has been made clear that the Tribunal should decide all the issues so that if the appeal Court reverses the finding on the issue of rashness and negligence, the appeal court is not required to either remand the matter or itself take up the determination of compensa