Punjab-Haryana High Court
Smt. Maya Kaur And Another vs State Of Haryana And Others on 14 January, 2014
Author: Ajay Kumar Mittal
Bench: Ajay Kumar Mittal
FAO No. 2396 of 1997 -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
FAO No. 2396 of 1997
Date of Decision: 14.1.2014
Smt. Maya Kaur and another
....Appellants.
Versus
State of Haryana and others
...Respondents.
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL.
PRESENT: Mr. Pawan Sharma, Advocate for
Mr. Ashit Malik, Advocate for the appellants.
Ms. Tanisha Peshawaria, DAG, Haryana.
AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J.
1. The present appeal filed by the claimants is directed against the award dated 31.7.1997 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kurukshetra (hereinafter referred to as "the Tribunal") whereby the claim petition filed by the claimants had been dismissed.
2. The facts, in brief, as narrated in the appeal are that the deceased aged 22 years was a religious person and used to earn ` 3000/- - ` 4000/- per month by performing Akhand Path and Kirtan. He was unmarried and was the only source of income for the family. At about 8.30 AM on 5.1.1995, when the deceased was coming from the side of Gurudwara Dasvi Patshahi towards Chhati Patshahi on his cycle and reached near Kali Kamli turn, a Haryana Roadways bus bearing No. HR-07-3062 came and struck with his cycle, as a result of which he fell Singh Gurbachan 2014.02.28 16:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh FAO No. 2396 of 1997 -2- down on the road and received multiple injuries and succumbed to his injuries at the spot. In this regard, FIR No. 3 dated 5.1.1995 was registered under Sections 279, 304-A of the Indian Penal Code. Accordingly, the claimants filed a petition claiming compensation to the tune of ` 15 lacs. The claim petition was contested by the respondents by filing two separate written statements. It was pleaded that no such accident took place with the bus and the FIR was already registered regarding this accident and as such the claimants were not entitled to any compensation. From the pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed by the Tribunal:-
"1. Whether the accident in question occurred due to rash and negligent driving of respondent No.3? OPP
2. If issue No.1 is proved then to what amount of compensation the petitioners are entitled to receive and from whom? OPP
3. Whether the claim petition is not maintainable?OPR 3(a) Whether the claimants have suppressed material facts, if so, to what effect? OPR
4. Relief."
3. The Tribunal took issues No.1 and 2 together being interconnected and on appreciation of evidence led by the parties decided the same in favour of the respondents holding that the claimants had failed to prove that the bus in question driven by respondent No.3 caused the accident. Thus, the claimants were not entitled to get any compensation from the respondents. Under issue No.3, the claim Singh Gurbachan 2014.02.28 16:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh FAO No. 2396 of 1997 -3- petition was held to be not maintainable. However, under issue No.3(a), it was held that the claimants have not suppressed any material fact. Accordingly, the Tribunal vide award dated 31.7.1997 dismissed the claim petition. Hence, the instant appeal.
4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
5. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that Swaran Singh son of Gopal Singh who was a passenger in bus bearing registration No. HR-07-3062 which met with an accident resulting in the death of Bhajan Singh, had appeared as PW2. According to the said witness, the accident took place due to the negligent driving of the driver of that bus.
6. On the other hand, learned State counsel supported the award passed by the Tribunal.
7. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, I do not find any merit in the appeal. RW2 Dalbir Kaur who was also a passenger in bus No. HR-07-3062 and had purchased her bus ticket for that day corroborated the version and testified as is given in the FIR, Ex.P2, wherein she has stated that on 5.1.1995 when she left for Kurukshetra from Pehowa on bus No. HR-07-3062 and on reaching near Kali Kamli, a person was lying unconscious on the road and was slightly crying. It was a foggy day and she requested the driver of the bus to stop and to take that person to the hospital on mercy ground. Similar statement was also made by RW1-Driver that a lady in the bus had requested him to take the injured to the hospital whereupon the injured was taken to LNJP Hospital, Kurukshetra when he was found lying on the road with the cycle. The testimonies of RWs along with FIR, Ex.P2 had been Singh Gurbachan 2014.02.28 16:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh FAO No. 2396 of 1997 -4- accepted whereas there was nothing to substantiate the statement of Swaran Singh PW2. In such circumstances, issues No.1 and 2 were decided holding that there was accident caused by some other vehicle and respondent No.3 out of sympathy had hospitalized the deceased and no accident was caused by him. The aforesaid finding has not been shown to be erroneous or perverse in any manner.
8. In view of the above, No illegality or perversity could be found in the findings recorded by the Tribunal which may call for interference by this Court. Finding no merit in this appeal, the same is hereby dismissed. No costs.
January 14, 2014 (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL)
gbs JUDGE
Singh Gurbachan
2014.02.28 16:11
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
High Court Chandigarh