F.A.O. No.3897 of 2008 -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
****
F.A.O. No.3897 of 2008
Date of Decision:03.11.2008
National Insurance Company Limited, Ambala
.....Appellant
Vs.
Smt. Shanti Devi and others
.....Respondents
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARBANS LAL
Present:- Mr. Ravinder Arora, Advocate for the appellant.
****
HARBANS LAL, J.
This appeal is directed against the award dated 7.8.2008 passed
by the Motor Accident Claims, Tribunal, Ambala vide which by allowing
the claim petition partly, an amount of Rs.2,49,000/- has been awarded as
compensation to the claimants along with interest at the rate of 9% per
annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of realisation.
The brief facts giving rise to the claim petition are that on
10.12.1006 Ashok Kumar was proceeding from Jagadhri to Khizrabad on a
new unnumbered motor cycle at a moderate speed followed by his brother-
in-law Sunil Kumar on a separate motor cycle bearing registration No.HR-
01-6571. At about 10:30/11:00 A.M., when they went a little ahead of
Chachrauli Town, they noticed a tractor/ trolley bearing registration No.
HR-02-N-7158 coming from the opposite direction being driven by Raj
Kumar, respondent rashly and negligently. Raj Kumar, respondent lost
control over his vehicle and collided with the motor cycle being driven by
Ashok Kumar. As a result of the impact of collusion, Ashok Kumar fell
F.A.O. No.3897 of 2008 -2-
down on the road and sustained injuries. Sunil Kumar who was following
him, rushed him to Kohli Hospital, Jagadhri in Tata Sumo from where he
was referred to Civil Hospital, Jagdhari from where he was referred to Civil
Hospital, Yamuna Nagar. Then he was referred to PGI, Chandigarh. When
he was being taken to PGI, he succumbed to the injuries. On these
allegations, the claimants filed the claim petition claiming compensation to
the tune of Rs.10 lacs on account of the death of Ashok Kumar. In their
written statement, the respondents resisted the claim petition. The issues
were framed by the learned Tribunal.
After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and examining
the evidence on record, the learned Tribunal passed the award as noticed at
the outset.
I have heard the learned counsel for the appellant, besides
perusing the findings returned by the learned Tribunal with due care and
circumspection.
Mr. Ravinder Arora, Advocate appearing on behalf of the
appellant urged with a good deal of force that as a matter of fact, the
deceased had died on account of his own rash and negligent driving. Raj
Kumar, respondent was driving the offending tractor at a moderate speed
and thus the award is liable to be set aside.
These contentions are unsustainable. FIR, copy of which is
Mark `A’ as well as the report under Section 173 of Cr.P.C, copy of which
is Mark `C’ tend to show that the accident occurred on account of reckless
and ruthless driving on the part of Raj Kumar, respondent. The age of the
deceased was 29 years at the time of accident. The income of the deceased
has been taken to be Rs.3,000/- being an unskilled worker. 13 has been
F.A.O. No.3897 of 2008 -3-
applied as multiplier. Thus, obviously, no fault can be found with the
findings recorded by the learned Tribunal. Seuqelly, this appeal being
devoid of any merit is dismissed.
November 03, 2008 ( HARBANS LAL ) renu JUDGE