( 1 ) ). PREFATORY PROFILE : after having, extensively, examined the testimonial collection and documentary evidence and having heard the elaborate and marathon submissions, in this group of 10 appeals, before, we discuss, determine and adjudicate upon the controversies raised relating to the negligence and the amount of compensation, in the realm of law of tort, following inevitable aspects, ought to be considered and articulated. 1. What is the fortune, only misfortunes can say. 2. The great and staggering human loss on account of road mishap contributing and affecting the national growth and resources. 3. The unsafe, avoidable, travelling and hazardous way of driving, that too of a public utility concern. Since this group of ten appeals raise painful but common, heart-stealing but identical facts emanating from the common judgment resolving eleven claims and also arising out of the common accident, they are being disposed of by this common judgment.

( 2 ) ). As the ill-luck would have been, on 9-5-1981, at dusk or at the time of sun-setting, around 6-00 p. m. , on account of violent accident between S. T. bus No. GRS-8673 and a passenger Matador No. GTU-1635 brought about real sunset in the lives of three promising and progressive careers of Agricultural scientists, who had, unfortunately, opted for travelling in a Matador van of gujarat Krushi University, coming to Junagadh University Campus from Rajkot side and out of seven other injured persons, darkness gloom in the lives of no less than five persons, who became victim of serious injuries, on account of the collision between the aforesaid passenger bus and the passenger Matador. Out of the 11 (eleven) claimants who filed claim petitions before the Tribunal, 8 were travelling in the passenger Matador belonging to the Gujarat Krushi university and two passengers were travelling in the S. T. bus of the appellant gujarat State Road Transport Corporation (G. S. R. T. C. ). Out of the 11 claims petitions, 10 appeals have been filed, by the appellant, G. S. R. T. C. , wherein, except in one appeal, original claimants have also raised cross-objections. Against one of the claimants, who was awarded less than Rs. 10,000. 00 for minor personal injuries by the Tribunal, petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India, had been filed at the instance of the G. S. R. T. C. , which we are reported, to have been dismissed. FACTUAL PARADIGMS - GENESIS OF VIOLENT ROAD ACCIDENT :

( 3 ) ). The accident in question occurred on 9-5-1981. 11 claim petitions out of which 8 for personal injuries, by the claimants and three fatal injuries by the heirs and legal representatives of the deceased victims of the road accidents, came to be filed before the aforesaid Tribunal invoking the aids of the provisions of Sec. 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (Old Act ). The injured claimants had sustained serious injuries, except three of varying gravity. The claim petitions came to be founded upon the plea that the driver of the S. T. bus, one Alegbhai bahadurbhai, was rash and negligent and responsible for the accident of violently dashing against the oncoming Matador driven by one Bharatbhai, belonging to the Gujarat Krushi University, on wrong side, while taking turn near a culvert and dragged the Matador at a distance of 60 ft. in the reverse direction, and virtually, the Matador went off the road and fell, almost, in a nearby pit. The bus belonged to the G. S. R. T. C. The Matador belonged to the Gujarat Krushi university. It was insured with New India Insurance Company. The victims of road accident, who were, travelling in the passenger Matador claimed compensation against the driver and owner of the S. T. bus, whereas the passengers who sustained injuries and who were travelling in the S. T. bus claimed compensation against s. T. authority as well as the Matador party treating all of them as joint tort- feasors. The S. T. bus party, by filing written statement, denied the liabil