RAFIQ, J.—Claimant Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation has preferred this appeal dissatisfied with award dated 11.02.2004 of learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bharatpur, in MAC Case No.6/1997, whereby learned Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.30,000/- to appellant RSRTC for damage caused to its bus on account of rash and negligent driving of driver of Truck No.RNG 1550 on 07.02.1995. It is prayed that compensation be enhanced to Rs.2,97,000/- with interest thereon at the rate of 12% per annum.. 2. It is contended that learned Tribunal has committed an error in not considering that a sum of Rs.66,177/- was spent on repairing of damaged bus and Rs.3,700/- towards towing charges. The appellant has proved the same before the Tribunal by documentary evidence. It is further contended that there was uncontroverted testimony of AW-2 Ram Kumar, who specifically stated that from 13.02.1995 to 30.03.1995, i.e. 54 days, the damaged bus was in stationary condition and remained off-route and a huge loss was suffered by the appellant Corporation. It is therefore prayed that appeal be allowed and the compensation be suitably enhanced. 3. Learned counsel for the respondents opposed the appeal and prayed for its dismissal. 4. Learned Tribunal, on the basis of material available, recorded that the accident took place on account of rash and negligent driving of driver of offending truck. AW-1 Ashok Mathuria, in cross-examination, has stated that receipt showing expenditure on denting has not been produced. He did not see the work of repairing of bus in workshop. He is not aware as to who prepared the job card. AW-2 Ram Kumar, in cross-examination, has stated that repairing work of chassis took 120 hours. As to how many persons were deployed in that work, he shown his unawareness. He did not prepare the job card. He did not produce on record the chart showing rotation of buses from 12.02.1995 to 31.03.1995. Even he could not state whether the bus service for the period from 13.02.1995 to 31.03.1995 from Jaipur to Banaras was in operation or not. From the documentary evidence produced on record, it is not clear as to what amount incurred under what head on repair of bus and no such particular is mentioned therein. In view of the above, learned Tribunal has rightly awarded lump sum compensation of Rs.30,000/- to appellant. From the documentary evidence produced on record, it is not clear as to what amount incurred under what head on repair of bus and no such particular is mentioned therein. In view of the above, learned Tribunal has rightly awarded lump sum compensation of Rs.30,000/- to appellant. Findings recorded by learned Tribunal are based on oral as well as documentary evidence and do not suffer from any infirmity or perversity. The appeal, being devoid of merit, is hereby dismissed.