Punjab-Haryana High Court
Reliance General Insurance Company Ltd vs Rakesh Gupta And Others on 20 March, 2012
Author: Jitendra Chauhan
Bench: Jitendra Chauhan
FAO No.5784 of 2011 (O&M) 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
FAO No.5784 of 2011 (O&M)
Date of decision: 20.3.2012
Reliance General Insurance Company Ltd.
...Appellant
Versus
Rakesh Gupta and others
...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN
Present: Mr.Tajender K.Joshi, Advocate for the appellant
Mr.AS Khinda, Advocate for respondent Nos.1 and 2.
None for respondent No.3.
****
Jitendra Chauhan, J. (Oral)
CM No.21711 CII of 2011 Despite sufficient opportunity, no reply has been filed by the respondents.
Keeping in view the averments made in the application, the delay of 28 days in filing the instant appeal is hereby condoned. CM is allowed.
FAO No. 5784 of 2011 FAO No.5784 of 2011 (O&M) 2
The Insurance Company has filed the present appeal, assailing the impugned Award dated 3.5.2011, passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kapurthala (for short 'the Tribunal'), whereby the claim petition was allowed and a sum of Rs.6,15,000/- was awarded as compensation to be paid by the appellant-Insurance Company.
The brief facts of the case are that on 26.11.2009, Nahel Gupta (since deceased) was coming back to his home at village Rawal from Kapurthala on his motorcycle. An Indica car bearing registration no.PB-08- BG-6377, being driven by Vijay Kumar Sondi, came from Sultanpur side and hit the motorcycle of Nahel Gupta. As a result thereof, he received multiple grievous injuries and was rushed to Civil Hospital, Kapurthala, but due serious condition, he was referred to Satyam Hospital, Jalandhar, where he succumbed to his injuries on 28.11.2009. The claim petition was filed by his parents. The learned Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.1,65,000/- towards medical expenses and Rs.4,50,000/- towards loss of dependency.
Learned counsel for the appellant contends that the learned Tribunal erred in law while determining compensation. He further states that the learned Tribunal has awarded a lump sum amount of Rs.4,50,000/- towards loss of dependency, which deserves to be set aside. He further states that there is no proof of on record that he was working as computer repair mechanic.
On the other hand, the learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos. 1 and 2- claimants vehemently opposes the prayer of the appellant and states that the deceased was a bright student of Computer FAO No.5784 of 2011 (O&M) 3 Engineering. He was the only son of his parents.
I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record carefully.
Admittedly, the death of Nahel Gupta, occurred in a road accident on 28.11.2009. From the perusal of Ex.A52, the Certificate of Diploma, he was holding a Diploma in System Management in the year 2007. He completed his 1st Year in Computer Diploma in June, 2009 as per Ex.A53. As per Exs.A56 and A57, he was doing part time job of computer repair mechanic. Moreover, he was the only son of his parents. During hospitalisation period before death, the parents of the deceased had spent a huge amount on his treatment.
In view of the above, no case for any interference in the award is made out. Accordingly, this Court finds that the amount awarded by the learned Tribunal is just and appropriate. As such, the present appeal is dismissed.
20.3.2012 (JITENDRA CHAUHAN) gsv JUDGE