- (1.) Since both the appeals arise out of one judgment and award passed by the learned Tribunal, hence the arguments have been heard together and they are being decided by this common judgment.
(2.) At the very outset, learned counsel for the appellants submits that the learned Tribunal while passing the impugned award has not taken into consideration the objections which they have raised by way of the aforesaid appeals. The finding of the learned Tribunal on issue no. 2 is contrary to the material available on record. Thus, the impugned award passed by the learned Tribunal qua issue no. 2 be quashed and set aside and the matter be remanded to the learned Tribunal with the direction to decide the matter afresh in the light of objections which they have raised by way of the aforesaid appeals. In support of their contentions, they have placed reliance on the following judgments: i) Sohan Lal Parsi Versus Sesh Reddy,1996 2 TAC 733 ii) Lal Chand Versus OICL,2007 RAR 9 iii)Rukmani Versus New India Asso., 1999 ACJ 171 iv) United India Insurance Co. Versus Smt. Janki Devi,2012 RAR 353 v) National Insurance Co. Ltd. Versus Swaran Singh and others, 2004 ACJ 1
(3.) E converso, the learned counsel for the respondents defended the impugned award and stated the same to be just and apposite.;