JUDGMENT 1. - Instant appeal has been filed by owner of offending I vehicle challenged the award dated 25th September, 2004 in MAC No. 1193/2004 whereby Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Special Judge, E.C. Act), Jaipur City awarded compensation of Rs. 12,75,787/- to the claimant injured, who became 100% disabled in the accident. 2. Claimant aged 35 years while going to Bari Chaupar (Jaipur) as a pillion rider on a Luna moped No. RSA-7471 driven by Smt. Kiran Rajput met with an accident with offending truck No. HR-68-0118 in front of Hawa Mahal coming from their behind being driven rashly and negligently by its driver on 16th May, 2001 at 11.40 a.m. - as a result whereof the claimant sustained grievous injuries and causing 100% permanent disability as opined by Medical Board. Claimant, as alleged, was Assistant Teacher serving in Rajendra Bal Mandir, Dariba Pan, Jaipur, and earning Rs. 6,750/- per month as is evident from certificate produced by her. Taking note of salary to the tune of Rs. 6,750/- per month, the learned Tribunal after deducting Rs. 1,500/- for her personal expenses, assessed financial assistance to her family to the tune of Rs. 5,250/- per month and keeping in view her age 35 years, adopted multiplier of 16 and finally awarded compensation of Rs. 12,75,787/- (including Rs. One lakh each towards loss of married life and for mental agony, pain and suffering due to 100% permanent disability and Rs. 50,000/- towards future treatment and Rs. 17,787/- for medical bills) vide impugned award. 3. Counsel for appellant contends that in support of her salary as claimed of Rs. 6,750/- no material has been placed on record except certificate issued by the School, which in no manner can be attributed to arrive at the conclusion that her monthly salary was of Rs. 6,750/-; as such finding recorded by learned Tribunal while awarding impugned compensation to the claimant on the basis of her salary as Rs. 6,750/- requires interference by this Court. Counsel further contends that it was a case of contributory negligence as is evident from site plan (Ext. 3), Smt. Kiran Rajput who was driving Luna moped whereon claimant was pillion rider, was equally negligent for the accident in question; as such finding recorded by learned Tribunal in respect of negligence of offending vehicle only is not corroborated by material on record. 4. 3), Smt. Kiran Rajput who was driving Luna moped whereon claimant was pillion rider, was equally negligent for the accident in question; as such finding recorded by learned Tribunal in respect of negligence of offending vehicle only is not corroborated by material on record. 4. Counsel for respondent-claimant on the other hand has supported finding recorded by learned Tribunal and submitted that looking to nature of injuries sustained and resulting into permanent disability for whole of her life, and so also her income for which sufficient material has been placed on record before learned Tribunal and she being pillion rider in totality of facts of the case, could not be held negligent on her part and in such circumstances, what has been finally awarded by learned Tribunal is based on material on record and does not require interference. 5. Counsel for the parties and with their assistance, examined material on record and gone through award impugned. So far as salary of claimant is concerned, certificate issued by Rajendra Bal Mandir where she was serving as Assistant Teacher was placed and the school being an aided educational institution, salary paid to its employee in no manner can be doubted and the certificate issued by the school authority in support of her monthly salary as Rs. 6,750/- in ordinary course is not to be disputed and more particularly when no contrary material has come on record from the opposite side. In my opinion, learned Tribunal has not committed any error while awarding impugned compensation on the basis of her salary certificate. 6. So far as question of negligence is concerned, I have perused site plan (Ext. 3), which clearly demonstrates that Smt. Kiran Rajput who was driving Luna moped in no manner can be held negligent and that apart, claimant being pillion rider even otherwise negligence cannot be attributed to her. In such circumstances, submissions made by Counsel for appellant are of no substance, hence rejected. 7. Consequently, this appeal fails and is hereby dismissed along with stay application Nos. 216/2005 & 2768/2005. Interim order shall stand vacated.Appeal dismissed. *******