Judgment Heard both sides. 2. The present Appeal is preferred by the original claimants, aggrieved by the finding and ultimate decision of the learned Member of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal that deceased Bhaurao, driver of the matador involved in the accident was equally rash and negligent in driving the vehicle like the original respondent no.2 i.e. the driver of the truck, which was involved in the accident. 3. In view of the above finding, though the learned Tribunal arrived at a conclusion that in all the compensation would have been Rs.82,000/-, 50% of the amount was deducted towards the contributory negligence of the deceased. 4. Mr. V.S. Bedre, learned counsel for the appellants submits that the findings of the learned trial Court are not based on any evidence in this regard. On the other hand, Mr. A.A. Joshi, learned counsel for respondent no.4 i.e. the Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. submits that no interference is warranted in the findings of the learned Member. 5. On the basis of this material, following point arises for my determination: Whether the learned Tribunal has come to a correct conclusion that the accident has occurred due to 50% contributory negligence of the deceased? My finding to the point is in the affirmative. The Appeal is therefore dismissed, without any order as to costs. REASONS : 6. No oral evidence was placed in the petition by any of the parties. The appellants are relying in the certified copy of the panchnama of the spot of occurrence at Exhibit 34 in this regard. Upon reading the contents of the panchnama in detail, the learned Tribunal came to the conclusion that the accident has occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the drivers of both the vehicles. The panchnama would show that width of the tar road was 25' with offsets of 5' from each of the side of the road, meaning thereby that the road was 35' in width. The panchnama would show that the headlights of both the vehicles were broken. Front portion of both the vehicles was totally compressed. In that view of the matter, the learned Member, by applying the maxim of "Res Ipsa Loquitur", came to the conclusion that the accident has occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of both the vehicles. 7. The panchnama would show that the headlights of both the vehicles were broken. Front portion of both the vehicles was totally compressed. In that view of the matter, the learned Member, by applying the maxim of "Res Ipsa Loquitur", came to the conclusion that the accident has occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of both the vehicles. 7. Resultantly, the Appeal deserves to be dismissed and is dismissed as such, without any order as to costs.