Punjab-Haryana High Court
M/S Cholamandalm Ms General Insurance ... vs Smt. Sunita And Others on 22 October, 2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
(1) FAO No. 5983 of 2012 (O&M).
Date of Decision: 22.10.2013.
M/s Cholamandalm MS General Insurance Company Limited
.... Appellant
Versus
Smt. Sunita and others .... Respondents
(2) FAO No. 5984 of 2012 (O&M).
Date of Decision: 22.10.2013.
M/s Cholamandalm MS General Insurance Company Limited .... Appellant Versus Paras Ram and others .... Respondents (3) FAO No. 5985 of 2012 (O&M).
Date of Decision: 22.10.2013.
M/s Cholamandalm MS General Insurance Company Limited .... Appellant Versus Anand Ram and others .... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAWAB SINGH Present: Mr. Rajneesh Malhotra, Advocate, for the appellant-Cholamandalm insurance co.
Mr. Pardeep Goyal, Advocate, for United India Insurance Company.
NAWAB SINGH.J (ORAL) This judgment shall dispose of afore-mentioned three appeals filed by M/s Cholamandalm MS General Insurance Company Limited insurer of offending tractor bearing No. HR-12-Q-
Sanjay 2013.10.30 10:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court FAO No. 5983 of 2012 (2)th 5562 against the Award dated May 10 , 2012 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sonepat (for short "the Tribunal").
2. On March 5th, 2011 Bhuttu, Sagar and Ram Kumar (all deceased) along with Chura Mani were traveling in jeep No. HR-13-5301 from Kharkhoda to village Silana. Satish was driving the jeep. He was driving the jeep at a moderate speed. When jeep reached near bye-pass Matindu Chowk, Kharkhoda, the offending tractor, being driven in a rash and negligent manner by Dharamender, came at a fast speed and struck against the jeep. Bhuttu and Sagar died on the spot. Ram Kumar was brought to PGIMS, Rohtak where he succumbed to his injuries next day, that th is, March 6 , 2011. Chura Mani (PW-4) also suffered injuries. FIR No.39 dated March 5th, 2011 under Section 304-A IPC was registered in Police Station Kharkhoda against driver of the tractor. On the dead bodies of deceased, Post-mortem examination was conducted.
3. Legal representatives of the deceased filed separate claim applications before the Tribunal.
4. The Tribunal, vide impugned Award, awarded compensation of Rs.4,70,000/- to the wife, children and mother of Ram Kumar, Rs.2 lacs to the mother of Sagar and Rs.2,54,000/- to the mother of Bhuttu.
5. In appeal before this Court, learned counsel for the insurer of the offending tractor has challenged the Award on two grounds (i) that the accident did not take place solely on account of negligent driving of tractor by Dharamender rather it occurred on account of negligence of Satish driver of the jeep as well. So, Satish driver, owner and insurer of the jeep should also have been held equally liable to make the payment of compensation and; (ii) that Dharamender was not holding a valid driving licence to drive the offending tractor.
6. To prove negligence, Chura Mani (PW-4) has spoken that the deceased along with him were traveling in the jeep when the offending tractor driven by Dharamnder came from Sanjay 2013.10.30 10:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court FAO No. 5983 of 2012 (3) opposite direction in rash and negligent manner and struck against the jeep. He has categorically stated that when the accident took place, Satish was driving the jeep at a moderate speed. There is no evidence on record to show that Satish was also negligent in causing the accident. Dharamender driver of the offending tractor did not appear into the witness box to put forth his case. The presence of Chura Mani is not doubted because he was traveling in the jeep when the accident took place. He was cross-examined by learned counsel representing the insurer of the tractor but nothing material could be elicited from his testimony to disbelieve him on any count. It is also not in dispute that Dharamender was challaned for causing the accident as is evident from the First Information Report (Exhibit PW-5/A) recorded immediately after the accident. In view of this, the finding of the Tribunal on issue No.1 that the accident took place on account of rash and negligent driving of driver of the offending tractor is upheld.
7. Licence of Dharamender (Exhibit R-1) was placed on record whereby he was authorised to drive the tractor. It was nd st valid from January 2 , 2009 to March 1 , 2026. The accident took th place on March 5 , 2011. There is no evidence in rebuttal to the fact that Dharamender was holding a valid driving licence. In this view of the matter, the finding of the Tribunal on issue No.3 that Dharamender was holding a valid driving licence on the date of accident, is also upheld.
8. In view of what has been stated above, the appeals filed by the insurance company are dismissed.
22.10.2013. (NAWAB SINGH)
SN JUDGE
Sanjay
2013.10.30 10:55
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
Punjab and Haryana High Court