JUDGMENT : Akil Kureshi, J. This appeal is filed by the ST Corporation challenging the judgment and award dated 11.9.1996 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bhavnagar in MACP No.79/1992. The claimants have filed the cross objection seeking enhancement in compensation. 2. Brief facts are that on 2.9.1991 deceased Rambhai was driving a jeep. He along with passengers were proceeding from village Badhoi towards village Sasariya. When they were travelling on Botad Barvala road at about 3:30 in the afternoon according to the claimant an ST bus came from the wrong direction and dashed against the jeep. The jeep overturned causing fatal injuries to the driver Rambhai. His widow and aged mother filed the said claim petition claiming compensation of Rs.2 lakhs from the ST Corporation. Before the claim petition, the ST Corporation hotly disputed negligence of driver. The Claims Tribunal however, held that ST driver was solely negligent in causing the accident and awarded compensation of Rs.1,30,000/- to the claimants. This award has given rise to the appeal by the ST Corporation and Cross Objection by the claimants. 3. The claimants had examined Kalubhai Fulbhai at exh.26. He was a co-passenger in the jeep. He deposed that on the date of accident when they were travelling on Botad Barvala road, an ST bus came from Sarangpur side and came face to face with the jeep. The jeep was being driven at the speed of 50 to 60. Bus was coming at a high speed. In order to avoid a clash, Rambhai took the jeep to his left. The side of the road was dug up for repair work. The bus dashed against the jeep. The jeep turned over. The driver came under the jeep and lost consciousness. In a passing ambassador car, he was shifted to hospital at Botad where he died on the same day. In the cross examination, he stated that there were stones lying on the side of the road in big heaps at 50 feet distance. Right side of the ST bus was clear. On the side of jeep it was dug up and heaps of stones were lying. Road was about 18 feet wide. 4. The claimants also examined one Hanifbhai Habibbhaiat exh.27 who stated that on the date of incident he had gone from Rajkot to Sarangpur carrying passenger in his taxi. Right side of the ST bus was clear. On the side of jeep it was dug up and heaps of stones were lying. Road was about 18 feet wide. 4. The claimants also examined one Hanifbhai Habibbhaiat exh.27 who stated that on the date of incident he had gone from Rajkot to Sarangpur carrying passenger in his taxi. While returning at about 3:30 in the afternoon between Sethli and Botad, there was an ST bus going in front of him, a jeep was coming from the opposite direction. The right hand side of the road was dug up and heaps of stone were lying because road construction was going on. At that time ST bus dashed against the side of the jeep due to which the jeep overturned. He had stopped but the bus driver had run away. The injured jeep driver was shifted to a hospital. 5. From such evidence, it clearly emerges that the accident took place because the bus travelled on the wrong side of the road forcing the jeep driver to take evasive action. According to the ST Corporation, however, version given by Rambhai in the FIR which he lodged was materially different. In such FIR which was produced at exh.15, the first informant had stated that the jeep overturned upon dashing against the stones lying on the road. Thus according to the ST Corporation the bus never dashed against the jeep and that therefore, there was no negligence of the bus driver. 6. In the form of substantive evidence we have deposition of two eyewitnesses before the Tribunal. Both stated that ST bus dashed against jeep causing it to overturn. The ST Corporation did not examine the bus driver who could have thrown light on the cause of the accident. Further I do not find any serious conflict in the version given by Rambhai in the FIR as against that he stated before the Tribunal. In the FIR also he had stated that the ST bus had come to the wrong side forcing the driver to turn the jeep towards left hand side. The left side of the road was dug up and stones were lying there. 7. In the FIR also he had stated that the ST bus had come to the wrong side forcing the driver to turn the jeep towards left hand side. The left side of the road was dug up and stones were lying there. 7. In either version, i.e. in the FIR or in the deposition, the consistent account is that the ST bus came on to the wrong side of the road, was being driven at a high speed forcing the jeep driver to take a sudden turn to the left. Whether thereafter, jeep turned over upon hitting stones or by ST bus is of no consequence. As a heavy vehicle being driven on a highway, the ST bus driver had no business to travel on the wrong side of the road that too at a high speed. Choices before the jeep driver were either to stick to his side of the road and face the possibility of head on collision or in the alternative to go off the road which in the present case was dug up with heaps of stones lying on the road side. In any case, it was the sole negligence of the ST bus driver in causing the accident. 8. Quantification of the compensation does not require any elaborate discussion. The deceased was aged about 32 years. He was doing driving work. Thus he was reasonably young person and shown to be having regular occupation and income. The total compensation awarded Rs.1.30,000/- was thus totally erroneous. The original claim of the petitioner was Rs.2 lacs. There was ample scope of awarding higher compensation. However, at least to the extent the claimants had filed the claim petition, same would be awarded. 9. The claimant would therefore, receive additional compensation of Rs.70,000/- from the ST Corporation to be paid with simple interest at the rate of 9% from the date of claim petition till actual payment. 10. First Appeal is dismissed. Cross Objection is allowed and disposed of. Appeal dismissed.