Punjab-Haryana High Court
Smt. Lachhmi Devi And Others vs Shiv Ram And Others on 12 December, 2008
Author: Sabina
Bench: Sabina
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH
F. A. O. No. 29 of 1990
Date of Decision: December 12, 2008
Smt. Lachhmi Devi and others ...........Appellants
Versus
Shiv Ram and others ..........Respondents
Coram: Hon'ble Mrs.Justice Sabina
Present: Mr.Brijeshwar Singh, Advocate for the
appellants.
Mr. Paul S.Saini, Advocate for the
New India Assurance Company Ltd.
* * *
Sabina, J.
This is an appeal filed against the award dated 04.8.1989 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ludhiana (hereinafter referred to as `the Tribunal).
The case of the claimant, as stated in claim petition, in brief, is that on 10.9.1981 Narain Das (since deceased) was travelling in truck No. HPA 6319 from Dharampur to Ludhina for sale of vegetables in the Vegetable Market. When the truck reached in the area of village Chhabowal, it met with an accident as it was being driven at a high speed in a rash and negligent manner. Narain Dass got crushed under the goods which fell on him. He was removed to the hospital but he could not be saved. Hence, the claim petition was filed.
F. A. O. No. 29 of 1990 -2-
Notice of the claim petition was issued to the respondents and they filed their written statements. On the pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed by the Tribunal:-
"1. Whether Narain Dass died in a motor accident on account of rash and negligent driving of vehicle No. HPA 6319 as alleged ?OPA
2. Whether the respondent No.3 is not liable as alleged in the preliminary objection No.1 of the written statement?OPR3
3. Whether the application is within time?
4. To what amount of compensation is the claimants entitled and against whom?
5. Relief."
Parties led their evidence in support of their case. Vide the impugned award, learned Tribunal dismissed the claim petition filed by the claimants and aggrieved by the same, claimants have filed the present appeal.
After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the opinion that this appeal deserves to be dismissed.
Claimants examined Janaki Ram (AW3) to prove the factum of accident. The said witness was allegedly travelling in the same truck in which Narain Dass was travelling. As per this witness, one truck came from the opposite direction and struck against truck in which he was travelling i.e. truck No. HPA 6319. Both the trucks turned turtle. In cross
-examination, he deposed that another truck had struck from behind against the truck in which he was travelling. He could not disclose the number of F. A. O. No. 29 of 1990 -3- other truck which had come from the opposite direction or behind the truck in which AW3 was travelling. The said witness, however, did not lodge the FIR nor proved on record any medical record regarding his own admission in the hospital on account of injuries suffered by him although he deposed that he was also admitted in the hospital along with Narain Dass.
FIR (Exhibit P1), on the other hand, was registered on 10.9.1981 by Bikkar Singh to the effect that one dead body was lying in a rotten condition and maggot infested in his `Bajra' fields near the main road. This also shows that Narain Dass was never admitted in the hospital as alleged by Janaki Ram (AW3). In these circumstances, learned Tribunal rightly held that Janaki Ram (AW3) had not witnessed the accident and consequently, rightly dismissed the claim petition filed by the claimants. The impugned award calls for no interference.
Accordingly, this appeal being devoid of any merit is dismissed with no order as to costs.
(Sabina)
December 12, 2008 Judge
arya