JUDGMENT V.K. Khanna, J. - The present First Appeal From Order and the connected First Appeal From Order have been filed under Section 110-D of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1939. 2. The brief facts for the purposes of deciding the present appeals are that the injured Nankoo, minor son of claimant Deep Lal, was involved in an accident with a Bus No. UTB 9284 belonging to the U.P. State Road Transport Corporation at 5.30 P.M. on 16-12-1977 on G.T. Road in village Babhrauli, District Allahabad. It is not disputed that on the date of occurrence the minor child Nankoo was travelling on a cycle along with another man on the left side of the road when he received injuries because of the accident. The injuries received were several in numbers including a fracture of one of his legs. The father and mother of the minor claimed compensation amounting to Rs. 40,000/- in the claim petition filed before the District Judge, Allahabad. 3. The aforesaid claim petition was contested by the U.P. State Road Transport Corporation by denying all the allegations made in the Claim petition except ex gratia payment of Rs. 250/- . According to the Corporation the Bus was being driven by Sharia Shankar Bajpai and conducted by Vishwa Nath Singh at about 5 P.M. when the Bus reached near Glass Factory and Harijan Abadi near Allahabad a man was seen coming on a cycle carrying another person on his cycle. Despite the drivers giving a horn to alert the cyclist on lowering the speed of the vehicle from about 10 Km, to about 15 Km. per hour the cyclist came on the left patri of the road and as soon as the Bus was to pass, the said cyclist suddenly turned to the right with the result that he dashed against to left side of the Bus and injuries were received due to this accident. 4. The Tribunal came to the conclusion that the Bus was being driven rashly and negligently on the date and at the time of the alleged accident and there was no contributory negligence on the part of the injured. It was found that the child had suffered 20% disability and accordingly the Tribunal awarded Rs. 25.000/- as compensation to the injured Nankoo. 5. It was found that the child had suffered 20% disability and accordingly the Tribunal awarded Rs. 25.000/- as compensation to the injured Nankoo. 5. It is against this award that Deep Lal, father of the minor Nankoo has filed First Appeal From Order No. 611 of 1980 and the U.P. State Road Transport Corporation has filed First Appeal From Order No. 370 of 1980. As the aforesaid two appeals arise out of the same award given by the Tribunal the same are being disposed of by a common judgment. 6. The learned Counsel for the U.P. State Road Transport Corporation has challenged the findings recorded by the Tribunal on the question as to whether Bus No. UTB 9284 was being driven rashly and negligently and whether the alleged accident was caused because of the negligence on the part of the person who was driving the cycle. Shri S.K. Sharma, learned Counsel appearing for the U.P. State Road Transport Corporation has been heard at some length and this court is of the opinion that the finding recorded on this question by the Tribunal is based on a correct appraisal of evidence, I Neither the driver nor the conductor of the Bus had come before the Tribunal to say that at the last moment when the bus was to pass the cyclist the cyclist abruptly took a turn towards right with the result that minor Nankoo received injuries due to fall from the cycle because of the hitting of the cycle by the Bus and not because Nankoo came under the Bus. Dr. A.Q. Siddiqui had been examined V in this case who had examined the injuries on the person of the minor Nankoo and according to his statement the injuries on the feet was a crush injury which could not have been crushed as a result of fall from the cycle. The testimony of Vishwa Nath Singh conductor was, therefore, not worthy of reliance. On the facts and circumstances of the case, I therefore, the court below rightly held that Bus No. UTB 9284 was being driven rashly and negligently on the dale and at the time of the alleged accident and there was no contributory negligence on the part of the injured. : The findings require no interference in these appeals. 7. On the facts and circumstances of the case, I therefore, the court below rightly held that Bus No. UTB 9284 was being driven rashly and negligently on the dale and at the time of the alleged accident and there was no contributory negligence on the part of the injured. : The findings require no interference in these appeals. 7. Learned counsel appearing for the Corporation has not been able to show as to how the quantum of compensation awarded to minor Nankoo suffers from any error of law requiring interference in these appeals. 8. No other point has been argued before us in these appeals. 9. For the reasons stated above, the two appeals are dismissed. However looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, the parties shall bear their own costs.