( 1 ) THIS is an appeal under sec. 110-D of the Motor Vehicles Act presented by an injured who was the petitioner in M. A. C. T. Application No. 12 of 1976 before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (1-A) Ahmedabad City.

( 2 ) ACCORDING to the petitioner while he was crossing the road on 11 at Maninagar opponent No. 1 dashed from behind while driving the scooter bearing registration No. G. J. G. 3858 and that resulted in fracture of the left femur bone and he was required to be treated at the Nursing Home in Ahmedabad. The claimant claimed an amount of Rs. 75 0 as compensation from driver of the scooter who was joined as opponent No. 1 and from the Insurance Company who was joined as opponent No. 2.

( 3 ) BOTH the opponents filed a joint written statement at exh. 15. According to the opponents the accident occurred because of the utter disregard of the traffic rules and own safety of the applicant himself. They averred in paragraph 7 of the written statement that the applicant got down from the car from the right hand side of the car instead of left hand side without taking care of the scooter approaching the car which was being driven by opponent No. 1 very carefully on the correct side of the road with very slow speed. It was further stated that opponent No. 1 had blown the horn and applied brakes but the applicant proceeded without paying any need to the same and therefore the said accident had occurred. In paragraph 8 it was stated that if the Tribunal came to the conclusion that opponent No. 1 was negligent to some extent the applicant also by his negligence contributed to the accident and therefore he is liable for contributory negligence. So far as the amount of compensation is concerned in the written-statement the opponents denied their responsibility in regard to the compensation and also stated that the applicant was not entitled to the amount stated in the application.

( 4 ) THE learned Member of the Tribunal framed issues at exh. 24. The learned Member of the Tribunal came to the conclusion that the accident was caused due to rash and negligent driving of the scooter by opponent No. 1. The learned Member of the Tribunal came to the conclusion that the applicant was not guilty of any contributory negligence. In those circumstances the learned Member of the Tribunal came to the conclusion that the applicant was entitled to compensation. The learned Member of the Tribunal therefore awarded the following amounts: rs. 2500-00 for pain and suffering rs. 2500-00 for loss of amenities to life rs. 60-00 for expenses for special diet rs. 150-00 for transport charges rs. 3825-00 for medical expenses -- rs. 9035-00thus an award for a sum of Rs. 9035-00 was passed in favour of the applicant with running interest at 6% from the date of the application till payment and costs on the claim allowed. This award is challenged by the applicant by filing appeal as rest of the claim of Rs. 65965. 00 was not allowed.

( 5 ) ON behalf of the opponents Cross-objections are filed and they are valued at a sum of Rs. 4500 and the basis is that the applicant was guilty of contributory negligence and therefore out of a sum of Rs. 9035. 00 which was awarded Rs. 4500. 00 should have been cut down on the basis that the applicant was also negligent.

( 6 ) WE have heard the learned Advocate Shri J. P. Patel for the appellant and Shri M. D. Pandya for the respondents at great length. Before we go to the question of compensation we would first deal with the question of negligence.

( 7 ) THE applicant is examined at exh. 25. According to him on 11 in the evening he went to Maninagar from Bhadra in a car. He wanted to go to the bungalow of Dr. Kantilal. According to him the car was stopped on the road on the opposite side of the bungalow of Dr. Kantilal and he got down near opposite footpath and thereafter he started crossing the road for going to the opposite side. According to him while he was crossing the road from east and was going