ORDER 1. Both these miscellaneous appeals under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 have been preferred against the common impugned judgment and award dated 16.09.2020 passed by the Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Neem-Ka-Thana, District Sikar (for short 'the Tribunal'), whereby the learned Tribunal partly allowed the Motor Accident Claim Petition No.108/2017 titled Smt. Pooja Devi & Others Vs. Gopal Gurjar & Others, filed by the claimants, herein and awarded Rs. 16,14,616/- as compensation in favour of claimants. 2. Since, both these appeals arise out of the same impugned judgment and award, they are being decided together by this common order. 3. In short, the relevant facts of the case are that on 19.04.2017 in the noon at about 01:50 P.M. deceased He tram was coming on the motorcycle from Neem-ka-thana to Village Dayal-ki-Nangal. When he reached at Mavanda Road near Sharda Sadan School, a roadways bus bearing registration No.RJ-14 PB 0208 came rashly and negligently from the wrong side of the road and hit He tram. He sustained serious injuries. He has been brought to Hospital at Neem-ka-thana for his treatment. He died due to injuries sustained by him in the alleged incident. The claimants preferred a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 claiming total compensation to the tune of Rs.1,06,30,000/-. 4. The learned Tribunal, after hearing all the parties, vide its impugned judgment and award dated 16.09.2020, partly allowed the claim petition filed by the claimants and awarded Rs.16,14,616/- in favour of the claimants on account of death of He tram in a road accident and ordered to recover the compensation award amount from the non-claimants jointly and severely. 5. Being dissatisfied by the impugned judgment and award, S.B. CM.A. No.3027/2020 has been preferred by the appellant-RSRTC challenging the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal and S.B. CM.A. No.3026/2020 has been filed by the claimants for enhancement of compensation amount. 6. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant-RSRTC has submitted that the only eye-witness examined by the claimants is Ram Singh (AW-1) whose testimony is not trustworthy. Counsel has further submitted that it is a case of head-on collusion and the learned tribunal, without considering the aspect of contributory/composite negligence, has held in an arbitrary manner that the driver of the bus was solely negligent. Counsel has further submitted that it is a case of head-on collusion and the learned tribunal, without considering the aspect of contributory/composite negligence, has held in an arbitrary manner that the driver of the bus was solely negligent. Lastly, counsel has argued that the learned Tribunal has awarded compensation on higher side without any factual foundation and, thus, the impugned judgment and award deserves to be quashed and set aside and the amount awarded may be reduced adequately. 7. On the other-hand, the learned counsel appearing for the claimants, has submitted that the amount of compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal is abysmally low. The learned Tribunal has committed an error in awarding total sum of Rs.16,14,616/- as compensation to the claimants, which is on lower side and the same is liable to be enhanced suitably. 8. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the material available on record. 9. The learned Tribunal, while dealing with the evidence available on record, has taken into consideration all the aspects of matter viz., negligence of the driver of the offending vehicle, monetary loss to the claimants on account of death of He tram and rightly awarded a sum of Rs.16,14,616/- as compensation in favour of claimants and against the non-claimants and appellant-RSRTC, which is just and proper. 10. I am also in agreement with the findings arrived at by the learned Tribunal while passing the impugned award and there is no reason to take a different view already taken by the Tribunal. 11. For the aforesaid reasons, I do not find any force in the appeal filed by the appellant-RSRTC as also the appeal filed by the claimants, as they, being bereft of any merit, are hereby dismissed. 12. Consequent upon the dismissal of both the appeals, all pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of accordingly.