JUDGMENT :

1. The present First Appeal is preferred by the insurance company against the judgement and award passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Auxiliary), Vadodara dated 22nd February 2013 in the Motor Accident Claim Petition No.407 of 1993, by which the learned Tribunal awarded the compensation of Rs.4,74,200/- with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum to the claimants from the date of the claim petition by holding the opponents Nos.1, 2 and 3 jointly and severally liable.

2. The brief facts of the case are that on 13th September 1992 at about 8:30 p.m., the deceased Ismailsha was going on a scooter bearing registration No.GCS 2612, belonging to the opponent No.2, as a pillion rider, for having work of the opponent No.2. The said scooter was being driven by opponent No.1 in rash and negligent manner and in excessive speed. As a result, the opponent No.1 has lost control over the scooter and went on wrong side and dashed with the truck. Therefore, the deceased Ismailsha, a pillion rider, flung away from the scooter and sustained lethal injuries. Thus, the accident took place on 13th September 1992 at about 8:30 p.m. on N.H. No.8 near Samrat Petrol Pump, due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the scooter i.e. opponent No.1.

3 The learned Tribunal has issued notice to the opponents and the insurance company and the owner of the vehicle have been served.

4 The learned Tribunal framed the issues for consideration and proceeded further by recording evidence of the witnesses from the claimants side and after giving proper opportunity to cross-examine such witnesses, the learned Tribunal has heard the arguments and proceeded for final judgement and award and accordingly, the learned Tribunal has awarded Rs.4,74,200/- with 7.5% interest, by holding the opponents Nos.1, 2, and 3 jointly and severally liable. Against that, the present appeal is preferred by the Insurance Company.

5. Learned advocate Mr. Vibhuti Nanavaty for the Insurance Company submitted that the claim was resisted by opponent No.3 – the Insurance Company. The Insurance Company, by filing written statement at Exhibit : 43, denied the averments made in the petition regarding the manner in which the accident took place, the alleged negligence on the part of the driver of the vehicle and also disputed the reasonableness of the amount claimed as compensation by the claimants. The Insurance Company has also disputed the fact that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the scooter. The Insurance Company has taken a plea that considering the contents of the FIR filed by the opponent No.1, the accident took place due to rash and negligent driving by the driver of the scooter only. The truck, with whom the accident occurred, could not be traced and therefore, the applicants falsely filed the present claim petition. He has contended that the learned Tribunal has erred in considering the income of the deceased as Rs.2,000/- per month, though admittedly the income of the deceased was found Rs.1,040/- per month. He has also submitted that the learned Tribunal has erred in relying on salary certificate produced at Exhibit : 50 as the witnesses who stepped into the witness box failed to adduce the supporting documents to prove the said salary certificate and therefore, the learned Tribunal has erred in considering such salary certificate for assessing the income of the deceased. He has also submitted that the learned Tribunal has erred in deducting 1/10 towards personal expenses of the deceased as it ought to have considered 1/4 income towards personal expenses. He has, therefore, submitted that the learned Tribunal has not properly considered the quantum of compensation. The learned advocate for the appellant has not raised any other ground as regards the amount of compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal. The Insurance Company has also disputed the rate of interest in the claim petition. He has submitted that this a