Punjab-Haryana High Court
State Of Haryana And Another vs Smt. Bira Devi And Another on 31 March, 2014
Author: K. Kannan
Bench: K. Kannan
FAO No.655 of 2000 -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
FAO No.655 of 2000
Date of Decision. 31.03.2014
State of Haryana and another ......Appellants
Versus
Smt. Bira Devi and another ......Respondents
Present: Mr. Roopak Bansal, Addl. A.G., Haryana
for the appellants.
CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN
1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the
judgment ?
2. To be referred to the Reporters or not ?
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?
-.-
K. KANNAN J. (ORAL)
1. The appeal is by the Sate. It was a claim for compensation for injuries suffered in a motor accident. The statement in defence was that the vehicle was driven by a person called Nafe Singh who was not the driver. The authorized driver, according to the Haryana Roadways, was Kuldip Singh. Kuldip Singh was examined as RW1 and he rejected the suggestion that he had entrusted the vehicle to Nafe Singh. If the contention of the State were to be that the vehicle was driven by a person who was not authorized and the authorized driver was before the Court to deny that he had entrusted the vehicle, the liability for the owner of the vehicle cannot be denied so long as it was an admitted fact that the vehicle had indeed been involved in the accident. An accident caused by a person who was either the driver or any person who could claim the custody of the vehicle to drive it and caused an accident, the owner must still take responsibility for the same. In this case, the Kamboj Pankaj Kumar 2014.04.02 16:07 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh FAO No.655 of 2000 -2- Tribunal has awarded a compensation making the respondents liable for ` 88,000/-. The Tribunal has tabulated the various heads of claim in para 29. The claimant was a householder and it was brought out in evidence that she had fracture of the right ankle, right elbow and right palm. The assessment to her disability was made at 15%. The overall compensation determined by the Tribunal providing also for a loss of earning capacity which was reckoned by the value of her services at a total amount of ` 88,000/- cannot be seen to be high.
2. The award is maintained and the appeal by the State is dismissed.
(K. KANNAN) JUDGE March 31, 2014 Pankaj* Kamboj Pankaj Kumar 2014.04.02 16:07 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh