JUDGMENT 1. - Since both the afore said appeals arise out of the judgment and award dated 20-1-2006 passed by Tribunal, hence the arguments have been heard together and they are being decided by this common judgment. 2. Brief facts of the case are that on 4-11-2001, a Maruti Car No. RJ 01 C 6165 met with an accident with Trailer bearing No. RJ 01 G 2041, which was owned by Chand Mohammad and the same was being driven by himself at the time of accident. The accident took place near Kunda Ki Beri Sarhad Sri Nagar. The Maruti Car which was being driven by the deceased at the time of accident was burnt with a blast, result into the death of the deceased. 3. Thereafter claim petition was filed, m notices were issued, issues were framed, evidence was recorded and after hearing both the sides, the learned Tribunal decreed an amount of Rs. 5,67,523/- in favour of claimants and against the non-claimants. 4. The Insurance Company has filed the instant appeal challenging the quantum of compensation, while the claimants have filed the appeal for enhancement of compensation. 5. Learned counsel for the Insurance Company has contended that the learned tribunal has not considered the important fact and law that the owner/deceased of the car was using the illegal gas cylinder kit instead of petrol as fuel, which is against the law. the learned Tribunal has wrongly awarded the compensation against the Insurance Company in the ratio of 60:40. The learned Tribunal has also failed to appreciate Ex. -5 i.e. post-mortem report in which it was mentioned that the cause of death was due to the suffocation and burnt which is sufficient to indicate that even if the Maruti Car has met with the accident with Trailer, then also the cause of death was not due to the injury sustained in the accident. He has further contended that the learned tribunal has not appreciated the Moka Naksha in which it was shown that the Maruti car was going towards Sri Nagar. The car was shown in the Moka Naksha at the right side across the road, which is sufficient to show that the car which met with accident with Trailer was at an high speed and negligent while overtaking the Trailer. Thus, the impugned award deserves to be quashed and set-aside. 6. The car was shown in the Moka Naksha at the right side across the road, which is sufficient to show that the car which met with accident with Trailer was at an high speed and negligent while overtaking the Trailer. Thus, the impugned award deserves to be quashed and set-aside. 6. E Converso, the learned counsel for the claimants contended that the impugned award relating to holding contributory negligence of deceased to the extent of 40% in the said accident is contrary to law and fact available on record. He has further contended that the learned Tribunal committed serious illegality by ignoring site plan Ex. 3, which clearly indicates that the Maruti Car was found to be on its correct driving side and the Trailer was offending vehicle and due to negligent driving of the vehicle, the accident had occurred. In this view of the matter, the award be modified and the entire assessed amount of compensation be awarded to the claimants. 7. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and carefully perused the relevant material on record, the impugned award is not found to have suffered from any legal flaw, rather it is found to be just and apposite. 8. For the reasons stated, I do not find any ground to interfere in the impugned award passed by the learned Tribunal and both the appeals filed by the Insurance Company as well as claimants being bereft of any merit deserve to be dismissed, which stand dismissed accordingly. 9. Consequent upon the dismissal of appeal, the stay application also stands dismissed.Appeal dismissed. *******