Delhi District Court
Raj Bala Poonia vs Ashok Kumar on 24 January, 2025
IN THE COURT OF MS. VRINDA KUMARI
PRESIDING OFFICER : MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS
TRIBUNAL, PATIALA HOUSE COURTS, NEW DELHI
IN THE MATTER OF:
RAJBALA POONIA & ORS. VS. ASHOK KUMAR & ORS.
MACP No.52/15
1. Smt. Rajbala Poonia (Wife of deceased)
W/o Late Sh. Surender Singh
2. Sh. Yogender Singh (Son of deceased)
S/o Late Sh. Surender Singh Poonia
3. Sh. Fateh Chand Poonia (Father of deceased)
S/o Sh. Sanvar Mal Poonia
Since deceased represented through
a) Smt. Parmeshwari (Wife)
b) Sumitra Punia (Daughter)
c) Vikas (Son)
d) Surender Singh Poonia (Son) (since deceased
represented through legal heirs)
i. Rajbala Poonia (Wife)
ii. Yogender Singh (Son)
iii. Parmeshwari (Mother)
4. Smt. Parmeshwari (Mother of deceased)
W/o Sh. Fateh Chand Poonia
All permanent R/o Village Mithari Kashri Singh,
Tehsil Rajgarh, District Churu,
Rajasthan.
Presently at :-
Ward No. 9, Near Bus Stand,
Rajgarh, District Churu, Rajasthan.
......Petitioners
Versus
MACP No. 52/15
Rajbala Poonia & Ors. Vs. Ashok Kumar & Ors. 24.01.2025 Page 1 of 17
1. Sh. Ashok Kumar (Driver)
S/o Sh. Badle Ram,
Since deceased being represented by legal heirs
a) Suman (Wife)
b) Kaushal Kumar (Son)
c) Mohit Kumar (Son)
All R/o H.No. 522, Jatav Mohalla,
Tughlakabad Village,
New Delhi-110044.
d) Anju Gautam (Daughter)
D/o Sh. Ashok Kumar
W/o Sh. Dheeraj Gautam
R/o H.No. 522, Jatav Mohalla,
Tughlakabad Village, New Delhi.
Also at Village Khera Khurd,
Ambedkar Colony, New Delhi-110082.
2. G4S Security Services (I) Pvt. Ltd. (Owner)
Plot No. 1 & 2,
Local Shopping Centre,
C-9, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi-110058.
3. ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd. (Insurer)
3/5, 3rd Floor, Aggarwal City Mall,
Plot No. 4, Road 44, Pitampura, Delhi-110034.
.........Respondents
Date of filing of claim petition : 12.05.2015 Date of filing of DAR : 23.03.2015 Date of framing of issues : 03.11.2015 Date of concluding arguments : 15.01.2025 Date of decision : 24.01.2025 AWARD/JUDGMENT
1. The claim for compensation raised in the present claim petition is in respect of fatal injuries alleged to have been MACP No. 52/15 Rajbala Poonia & Ors. Vs. Ashok Kumar & Ors. 24.01.2025 Page 2 of 17 sustained by the deceased Sh. Surender Singh Poonia in a motor accident that took place on 09.10.2009, infront of Belgium Embassy Visa Gate, Shanti Path, Chanakya Puri, New Delhi, regarding which one FIR No.173/09, under Sections 279/304-A IPC was registered at PS Chanakyapuri. The offending vehicle involved in this case is a Gypsy bearing registration No. DL-9CQ-0488, which at the relevant time of accident was being driven by respondent no.1 (R1) Sh. Ashok Kumar, owned by respondent no. 2 (R2) G4S Security Services and insured with respondent no. 3 (R3) ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd.
2. It is the case of the petitioners that on 09.10.2009, the deceased was going on his motorcycle bearing registration No. UP-16R-0605. When he reached in front of Belgium Embassy Visa Gate, Shanti Path, Chanakyapuri, New Delhi, all of a sudden, a Gypsy bearing registration No. DL-9CQ-0488, which was being driven by respondent no. 1 in a rash and negligent manner, took a U turn and hit the deceased due to which he sustained grievous injuries. It is further submitted that the deceased was removed to Dr. RML Hospital where he was declared brought dead by the doctors.
3. Respondents no. 1 and 2 have filed their written statement wherein it is submitted that on the day of accident the offending vehicle was being driven by R-1 who was on night duty along with other checking staff of R-2. At the night, the official checking was being carried out in Chanakya Puri area by security officer, namely, Sh. B Kumar, Marshals Deepak and Bhupender, all employees of R-2. When they reached at the gate MACP No. 52/15 Rajbala Poonia & Ors. Vs. Ashok Kumar & Ors. 24.01.2025 Page 3 of 17 of Poland Embassy at about 2:45 am, they saw an unknown person lying in an unconscious condition in front of Belgium Embassy, Shanti Path, New Delhi which is just opposite to the Poland Embassy gate. All the persons in the offending vehicle got down. Sh. B. Kumar called 100 number. Thereafter, PCR Van reached the spot and took the injured to Hospital. It is submitted that the DD entry bearing No. 33A dated 09.10.2009 was lodged by PS Chanakyapuri on the basis of information received from the Control Room. The Police Control Room had farwarded the said information on the basis of the call made by Security Officer Sh. B Kumar of the R-2. It is further submitted that the alleged offending vehicle was duly insured with them w.e.f. 01.08.2009 to 31.07.2010. It is further submitted that the no accident had ever occurred between the alleged offending vehicle and motorcycle of deceased.
4. Respondent no. 3/Insurance Company filed its written statement wherein it is submitted that the alleged accident took place due to sole fault and negligence of deceased himself as he was driving the motorcycle at a high speed, in a rash and negligent manner and without driving license. It is further submitted that two eye witnesses Sh. Vijay Kumar and Sh. Gaurav Kumar were planted in the present matter. It is further submitted that the alleged offending vehicle was falsely implicated in the present matter. It is further submitted that the alleged offending vehicle was duly insured with them w.e.f. 01.08.2009 to 31.07.2010 in the name of respondent no. 2.
5. On 03.11.2015, the following issues were framed by this Tribunal as:-
MACP No. 52/15 Rajbala Poonia & Ors. Vs. Ashok Kumar & Ors. 24.01.2025 Page 4 of 171. Whether the deceased sustained fatal injuries in the accident which occurred on 09.10.2009, infront of Belgium Embassy Visa Gate, Shanti Path, Chanakyapuri, New Delhi caused by rash and negligent driving of vehicle No. DL-9CQ-0488 driven by respondent no.1, owned by respondent no. 2 and insured with respondent no. 3 ? OPP.
2. Whether the petitioners are entitled for compensation? If so, to what amount and from whom? OPP.
3. Relief.
6. In support of their claim, the petitioner no. 1 Smt. Raj Bala Poonia examined herself as PW1. Her affidavit in evidence is Ex. PW1/A. She relied upon certain documents. Copy of her election ID card is Ex. PW1/1. Copy of election ID card of petitioner no. 3 is Ex. PW1/2 (OSR). Copy of election ID card of petitioner no. 4 is Ex. PW1/3 (OSR). Copy of graduation marksheet of deceased is Ex. PW1/4 (OSR). Copy of certificate issued by Adjutant-55 BN, C.R.P.F. is Ex. PW1/5 (OSR). Copy of certificate qua information of salary of deceased is Ex. PW1/6 (OSR). Copy of receipt is Ex. PW1/7. Copy of birth certificate of petitioner no. 2 is Ex. PW1/8 (OSR). Copy of driving license of deceased is Ex. PW1/9. Copy of death certificate of deceased is Ex. PW1/10. Copy of secondary school certificate of deceased is Ex. PW1/11. Copy of ration card of deceased is Ex. PW1/12. Copy of PPO of deceased is Ex. PW1/13 (OSR). DAR filed by the IO is Ex. PW1/14 (colly). Copy of LLB marksheet of deceased is Mark A.
7. The petitioners have examined SI Ishwar Singh, MACP No. 52/15 Rajbala Poonia & Ors. Vs. Ashok Kumar & Ors. 24.01.2025 Page 5 of 17 RAF, CRPF, R.K. Puram, New Delhi as PW2 who produced the offer of appointment for the post of SI to the deceased and proved character roll verification certificate, pay commission arrear details, salary slip for the year 2008 -2009, GIS detail, death cum retirement gratuity, deposit link insurance, leave encashment, annexure 10 & 11, record of salary for the year 2003 and 2007 as Ex. PW2/1 (colly).
8. The petitioners have also examined one Sh. Gaurav Kumar as PW3. His affidavit in evidence is Ex. PW3/A. He relied upon certain documents. His statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. is Ex. PW3/1 (colly) and supplementary statement is Ex. PW3/2 (colly).
9. The petitioners have also examined Constable Gyan Chand Meena as PW4 who has placed on record attested copy of verification letter dated 06.11.2003 regarding character and antecedents of deceased, attested copy of appointment letter dated 27.01.2003, attested copy of second installment of pay commission arrears, attested copy of salary records for the year 2003 and 2007 to 2009, attested copy of muster roll records, message with regard to GPF to the deceased, attested copy of details for payment of death benefits after the death of SI Surender (Ex. PW4/B (colly)).
10. Respondent no. 1 examined Sh. Ashok Kumar as R1W1. His affidavit in evidence is Ex. R1W1/A.
11. Respondent no. 3 examined Sh. Bablu Kumar @ B. Kumar as R3W1. Copies of his Aadhaar card and ID card issued by LIC as Ex.R3W1/1 (colly) (OSR).
12. Respondent no. 3 also examined one Sh. Bhupinder MACP No. 52/15 Rajbala Poonia & Ors. Vs. Ashok Kumar & Ors. 24.01.2025 Page 6 of 17 Singh as R3W2. His affidavit in evidence is Ex. R3W2/A. Copy of his Aadhaar card as Ex.R3W2/1.
13. Respondent no. 3 also examined one Sh. Parshuram Singh, Assistant Director from Govt. of NCT of Delhi as R3W3 who has placed on record copy of his ID card as Ex. R3W3/1 (OSR) as well as the crime scene report as Ex.R3W3/2 (OSR).
14. Respondent no. 3 also examined one Ms. Samridhi, Ahlmad from the Court of Ld. MM, Patiala House Court, New Delhi as R3W4 who produced the office copy of summoned record of FIR No. 173/2009, PS Chanakyapuri, New Delhi, case No. 47626/2016, titled as State Vs. Ashok Kumar pertaining to the forensic report dated 22.01.2010 and proved the reply to the notice under Section 133 MV Act given by the owner of the vehicle DL-9CQ-0488, statement of PW1 Pradeep along with cross examination and ordersheet dated 09.11.2022, 09.02.2023 and 22.05.2023 as Ex. R3W4/1 (colly).
15. The Tribunal heard the final arguments advanced by Sh. Arun Yadav, Ld. Counsel for petitioners, Sh. Manoj Kumar, Ld. Counsel for R-1 and R-2 and Mohd. Raghib, Ld. Counsel for R-3/Insurance Company and has carefully perused the entire case record along with written submissions filed on behalf of petitioners and R-3/Insurance Company.
16. The findings on the aforementioned issues are rendered hereinafter in the succeeding paragraphs.
17. ISSUE NO. 11. Whether the deceased sustained fatal injuries in the accident which occurred on 09.10.2009, infront of Belgium Embassy Visa Gate, Shanti Path, Chanakyapuri, New Delhi caused by rash and negligent driving of vehicle No. MACP No. 52/15 Rajbala Poonia & Ors. Vs. Ashok Kumar & Ors. 24.01.2025 Page 7 of 17 DL-9CQ-0488 driven by respondent no.1, owned by respondent no. 2 and insured with respondent no. 3 ? OPP.
18. Onus to prove this issue was upon the petitioners. The first question that needs to be decided is whether the accident was caused by the vehicle bearing registration No. DL-9CQ-0488.
19. In order to prove the same, the petitioners have examined one Sh. Gaurav Kumar, an eye witness of accident, as PW3 who in his affidavit in evidence Ex. PW3/A has deposed the manner of accident as follows :-
"2.That on the fateful day of 8.10.2009, the deponent and his friend Vijay Kumar along with their friend Pradeep Kumar, who was to proceed for Delhi to Mumbai, had gone to drop him at Railway Station, Delhi and had started from Gurgaon to Delhi at 11:00 PM on motorcycle and had again started back for Gurgaon at 2:00 AM by motorcycle and at about 3:00 PM when reached opposite Kuwait Embassy on Shanti Path, in the meantime they saw the offending vehicle coming from Poland Embassy by taking U-turn on Shanti Path and when it further moved after taking U-turn, in the meantime the driver/respondent no. 1 of the offending vehicle hit the motorcycle who was coming from Moti Bagh side from its left side and as a result the said motorcyclist fell on the side of footpath in front of Belgium Embassy and motorcycle also fell just ahead and on which they stopped little ahead and saw that blood was oozing out from the mouth of the injured and he was unconscious. The said vehicle with No. DL-9CQ-0488 belong to Group 4 security and was meant for checking and was carrying staff of Group 4 Security.
3. That 2-3 guard from the nearby MACP No. 52/15 Rajbala Poonia & Ors. Vs. Ashok Kumar & Ors. 24.01.2025 Page 8 of 17 Embassies also came there and started telephoning to the police in front of us and the deponent and his friend left the place as they did not want to get harassed by the police. The deponent and his friend had left the place after noting down the number of the offending vehicle and motorcycle No. UP-16R-0605.
4. That after about one month his friend Vijay after returning from his in-laws had told him that the motorcyclist in the above said accident was known to his relatives and the persons of Group 4 Security has told that the said accident has been caused due to slip of the motorcycle.
5. That thereafter father of the deceased Surender Singh had met us in Gurgaon and we had told him about the occurrence of above mentioned incident. The deponent and his friend subsequently visited to Mandir Marg Police Station and thereafter visited the place of occurrence and the site plan was prepared and the statement was recorded.
6. That subsequently he visited the P.S. Mandir Marg again on 20.09.2014 and had identified the driver of the offending vehicle and confirm to the IO about the driver of the offending vehicle who had caused the accident on 09.10.2009 near Belgium Embassy. The deponent had earlier seen him in the court. The I.O. had told that the driver has been arrested. The depondent had also identified the offending vehicle. On the identification of the deponent, arrest memo, personal search memo was signed by the deponent. His second statement was recorded in the police station."
20. Respondents no. 1 and 2 put-forth their version of the incident through respondent no. 1/driver who examined himself as R1W1. In his affidavit in evidence Ex. R1W1/A, he deposed regarding the manner of accident as follows :-
MACP No. 52/15 Rajbala Poonia & Ors. Vs. Ashok Kumar & Ors. 24.01.2025 Page 9 of 17" 4 B. That on the date of accident on 09.10.2009, the alleged offending vehicle No. DL-9CQ-0488 was being driven by the Respondent No. 1 who was on night duty along with other checking staff of the Respondent No. 2. At the night, the official checking was being carried in Chanakya Puri area by the Security Officer namely Sh. B. Kumar, Marshal's Deepak and Bhupender, all employees of the Respondent No. 2.
C. That when the Deponent/Respondent No. 1 reached at the gate of Poland Embassy at about 02.45 A.M., he saw an unknown person lying in an unconscious condition in front of Belgium Embassy Shanti Path New Delhi, which is just opposite of the Poland Embassy gate. To help the said person, the Deponent/Respondent No. 1 stopped the alleged offending vehicle at the road side in front of Poland Embassy and all the persons got down from the alleged offending vehicle and in order to save that unknown person, the Security Officer namely Sh. B. Kumar called on 100 number and thereafter PCR van came at the spot of the accident and took the injured person to the Hospital."
21. Respondent no. 3/Insurance Company also examined one Sh. Bhupinder Singh, Marshall in G4S Secure Solutions (India) Pvt. Ltd. as R3W2 who in his affidavit in evidence Ex. R3W2/A has deposed as under :-
"2. That on intervening night of 8th and 9th October, 2009, I was on duty as a Marshall along with checking team i.e. Mr. Deepak (Marshall), Mr. B. Kumar (Security Officer) and Ashok Kumar (Driver of vehicle No. DL9CQ-0488 in the QRT of G4S Secure Solutions (India) Pvt. Ltd., when we reached at the gate of Polant Embassy at about 02:45 AM., We saw an unknown person lying in an unconscious condition infront of MACP No. 52/15 Rajbala Poonia & Ors. Vs. Ashok Kumar & Ors. 24.01.2025 Page 10 of 17 Belgium Embassy, Shanti Path, New Delhi, which is just opposite of the Poland Embassy Gate. Our officer Mr. B. Kumar told to the driver Ashok to stop the said vehicle at the road side in front of Poland Embassy and we all the persons got down from the said vehicle and in order to save that unknown person of the accident which had already happened on the other side of the road, we reached after crossing the road towards Belgium Embassy where said unknown person was lying and we saw the injured was in unconscious condition and he was taking deep breath then our Security Officer namely Sh. B. Kumar called the police and dialed 100 number and thereafter PCR van came at the spot of the accident and took the injured person to the Hospital."
22. Respondent no. 3/Insurance Company also examined Sh. Bablu Kumar @ B. Kumar as R3W1 who in his examination in chief has deposed as under :-
"On Intervening night of 8th and 9th October, the checking team present in the QRT, I being security officer of G4S Secure Solutions (India) Pvt. Ltd. Along with Marshal's Deepak and Bhupender and the driver of the Company on vehicle no. DL-9CQ-0488 were checking Chanakya Puri area. When we reached the gate of Poland Embassy at about 2:45 hrs, I saw an unknown person lying in unconscious condition in front of Belgium Embassy which is just opposite the Poland Embassy. I asked my driver Ashok Kumar to stop the vehicle and driver stopped the said vehicle on the road in front of Poland Embassy and we all got down from the vehicle and in order to save the said injured/victim of the accident which had already happened on the other side of the road, we reached after crossing the road towards Belgium Embassy where said MACP No. 52/15 Rajbala Poonia & Ors. Vs. Ashok Kumar & Ors. 24.01.2025 Page 11 of 17 unknown person was lying and I saw the injured was in unconscious condition and he was taking deep breath then I called the PCR No. 100 as well as ambulance and thereafter PCR came on the spot and took the injured person to the hospital. The vehicle bearing no. DL-9CQ-0488 was not involved in the above said accident in any manner."
23. Now I will consider whether testimony of PW3/Sh. Gaurav is credible. In her cross examination, PW1 has stated that her father in law brought two eye witnesses to the police on whose statements the police arrayed the vehicle bearing registration No. DL-9CQ-0488 as the offending vehicle. She further deposed that the witnesses had informed about the accident to one of the relatives after about 5 to 6 months of the accident. The witnesses had no relation with her family. The witnesses disclosed about the accident to their relative who subsequently informed her father-in-law.
24. In his affidavit in evidence, PW3 has deposed that on the fateful night, he and his friend Vijay were returning to Gurgaon on a motorcycle after dropping their friend Pradeep at Railway Station and at around 3 am, they reached opposite Kuwait Embassy on Shanti Path. During his cross examination, he deposed that he and his friends Vijay and Pradeep were riding on a single motorcycle. I shall now refer to the testimony of Sh. Pradeep recorded in case FIR No. 173/2009, PS Chanakyapuri titled as State Vs. Ashok Kumar {part of Ex. R3W1/1 (colly)}. During his cross examination, he deposed that he, Gaurav and Vijay were riding on two separate motorcycles. He was sitting with Gaurav while Vijay was on the other motorcycle. Contradiction has, thus, emerged on a vital detail of the event.
MACP No. 52/15 Rajbala Poonia & Ors. Vs. Ashok Kumar & Ors. 24.01.2025 Page 12 of 1725. The crime scene report of FSL {Ex. R3W3/2(OSR)} mentions scratches on left back portion, front left foot rest, left and right portion of the leg guard. Wear and tear was observed on outer portion of rubber handle. It was opined that 'no sign which is indicative of collision with other vehicle was observed in the motorcycle'.
26. The chargesheet shows that when IO the then SI MP Saini reached the spot, he found right indicator of the motorcycle broken and scratches on left side. Blood stains on the road were also found.
27. The cancellation final report (Ex. R1W1/R3A) which was initially filed by the IO mentions that the motorcycle was lying in accidental state in front of Belgium Embassy near the foot path. Blood stains were near the Visa Gate of the Embassy. Photographs of the crime scene were also taken (but they have not been placed on record in the present petition). Motorcycle was got inspected from FSL. Report of FSL has been discussed above. Names of two eye witnesses Shyam Singh and Virender Kumar are mentioned in the cancellation report who stated that the motorcycle had slipped on its own. After the accident, QRT van of Group 4 Security reached the spot and Supervisor B Kumar called the PCR. On the basis of statements of the eyewitnesses and FSL result, the IO filed cancellation report.
28. Thereafter, a protest petition was filed upon which further investigation was ordered by Ld. JMFC concerned. Father of deceased produced Sh. Gaurav and Sh. Vijay as eyewitnesses. They informed the police that they saw the QRT van causing the MACP No. 52/15 Rajbala Poonia & Ors. Vs. Ashok Kumar & Ors. 24.01.2025 Page 13 of 17 accident from the left side of the motorcycle because of which the deceased fell on one side. The site plan filed along with the subsequent chargesheet prepared on the basis of statements of Sh. Gaurav and Sh. Vijay would show that the motorcycle was travelling from South direction to North direction on Shanti Path. QRT Van was coming from North direction to South direction. There was a divider between these two roads. Belgium Embassy is located on the road on which the motorcyclist was travelling while Poland Embassy is located on the road on which QRT Van/Gypsy was travelling. These two Embassies are situated opposite to each other. For coming on the road in front of the Belgium Embassy, QRT Van took a U turn instead of turning from around the round-about and hit the motorcycle. As per these eye witnesses (Sh. Gaurav and Sh. Vijay), motorcycle was hit on its right side. Chargesheet would show that the motorcycle was found by the police on the left side of the road near footpath with blood stains near the Visa Gate which is also on the left side of the road.
29. Now, I shall consider how PW3 has explained the delay of four year in his coming forward to give a statement to the police. In his cross examination, he has deposed as follows :-
"I did not ever visit the local station of the above place of accident to find out if any FIR was registered by the police or not regarding the above accident. Vol. However, I came to know about registration of a case regarding the above accident through my friend Vijay. Vijay was married in a village in District Rajgarh, Rajasthan and he was told about the said case by one Dayaram of his village as the above Dayaram was known to family of the deceased. I do MACP No. 52/15 Rajbala Poonia & Ors. Vs. Ashok Kumar & Ors. 24.01.2025 Page 14 of 17 not personally know the above Dayaram or the family of the deceased but the deceased was also a resident of some village in District Rajgarh, Rajasthan.
I do not know whether any call to the police regarding the above accident was made or not and if made, by whom it was made. I do not know if the call to the police was made by the respondent no. 1 Ashok Kumar himself who was driving the offending vehicle when he had found a person lying on the road in injured condition. The number of the offending Gypsy was DL-9CQ-0488 and the number of the motorcycle of the deceased was UP-16R-0605. (In reply to court queries, the witness states that these numbers were noted down by him at the place of accident and then he noted it down on a wall of the house in which he was residing. I cannot tell any reason as to why instead of writing these numbers on any paper or any diary or register etc., I chose to write it on a wall. The pen as well as diary and papers etc. were available in my room at that time. I did not thought it proper to communicate these numbers to the police or any authority nor Vijay did so. When Vijay and I came to know about the registration of a case after a month thereof, still I or Vijay did not communicate these numbers to the police or to the above Daya Ram. I first met with the police in connection with this case in the year 2013 when I was called for investigation and only then we had communicated these numbers to the police for the first time). It is wrong to suggest that I did not communicate these registration numbers or about the accident to the police or any other authority for such a long time as we never witnessed the above accident. I visited the PS Mandir Marg 2-3 times for investigation of this case. I visited the PS in the year 2013 and 2014, but I cannot tell the dates. Though, I was called by MACP No. 52/15 Rajbala Poonia & Ors. Vs. Ashok Kumar & Ors. 24.01.2025 Page 15 of 17 the police, but no written notice was given to me. I and Vijay accompanied the father of deceased to the PS. Vijay and the deceased are not related."
30. The above said circumstances narrated by PW3 regarding how he gave his statement to police after nearly 4 years of the accident do not appear to be natural and do not inspire confidence of the Tribunal. The chargesheet shows that Sh. Vijay, the other eyewitness, had informed his relative Sh. Dayaram about the accident and the offending vehicle one month after the accident. Sh. Dayaram was friend of the father of the deceased. There is no explanation as to why it took more than 4 years for these witnesses to come forward. Such a delay calls for a corroborative evidence and there is none. Second eye witness Sh. Vijay has also not been examined by the petitioners. The report of FSL filed along with initial cancellation report can also not be ignored. Versions of R1W1, R3W1 and R3W2 are consistent from initial stage onwards. The tilt of scales of balance of probability is more towards respondents no. 1 and 2 than the petitioners.
31. In light of unexplained delay of 4 years that PW Sh. Gaurav took in coming forward and also in light of FSL report filed with initial chargesheet, the petitioners have not been able to prove that the aforesaid accident took place due to rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle bearing registration no. DL-9CQ-0488. Hence, this issue is decided against the petitioners and in favour of the respondents.
ISSUE NO. 2 MACP No. 52/15 Rajbala Poonia & Ors. Vs. Ashok Kumar & Ors. 24.01.2025 Page 16 of 172. Whether the petitioners are entitled for compensation? If so, to what amount and from whom? OPP.
32. Since the issue no. 1 has been decided against the petitioners, the petitioners are not entitled to any compensation.
ISSUE NO.3/RELIEF
33. In view of finding on issue number 2, the present matter is dismissed and the the petitioners are held not entitled to any compensation amount in the present matter.
PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON THIS 24TH DAY OF JANUARY 2025 Digitally signed by VRINDA VRINDA KUMARI Date: (Vrinda Kumari) KUMARI 2025.01.24 Judge / PO, MACT 17:36:29 New Delhi/24.01.2025 +0530 MACP No. 52/15 Rajbala Poonia & Ors. Vs. Ashok Kumar & Ors. 24.01.2025 Page 17 of 17