Punjab-Haryana High Court
Oriental Insurance Company Ltd vs Baljitkaur And Ors on 10 December, 2014
Author: Fateh Deep Singh
Bench: Fateh Deep Singh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
FAO No.2151 of 1996 (O&M)
Date of decision: 10th December, 2014
The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd.
! Appellant
Versus
Baljit Kaur and others
! Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FATEH DEEP SINGH
1. Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers may be allowed
to see the judgment?
2. Whether to be referred to the Reporters or not?
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?
Present: Mr. Ashwani Talwar, Advocate
for the appellant.
None for respondents No.1 to 6.
Service of respondents No.7 to 9 - dispensed with.
FATEH DEEP SINGH, J.
The appellant/insurer has sought to challenge the Award of learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Patiala dated 26.03.1996 whereby a sum of `4.00 lacs with interest was awarded to the claimants on account of the death of Shingara Singh in a motor vehicular accident.
Upon hearing Mr. Ashwani Talwar, Advocate for the insurer/appellant.
The solitary question that arises is pertaining to the findings returned by the learned Tribunal qua the obligation of the RATTAN PAL SINGH 2015.04.10 10:58 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Punjab & Haryana High Court FAO No.2151 of 1996 (O&M) 2 insurer to pay compensation as well as its quantum. It was on 02.09.1992 around 7.30 a.m. the offending truck bearing No.DEG- 4977 being driven by respondent Bhura Singh hit the Maruti van being driven by the deceased Shingara Singh resulting in his death. The family claims that the claimants are legal representatives being widow, minor children and thus, were dependent on the earnings of the deceased. It has not been controverted either before the Tribunal or before this Court that the deceased at the time of accident as per the post mortem report Ex.P2 was aged around 40 years and his avocation of a taxi driver is also not disputed. Learned Tribunal though has not accepted the earning part of the claimants and has held that the deceased as per his avocation and status must be earning `3,000 per month and after deduction for his own upkeep and maintenance considering dependency to be `2,000 per month and applying multiplier of 16 has awarded compensation to the tune of `3,84,000 and besides this has awarded `16,000 under the conventional heads totaling to `4,00,000.
Learned counsel for the appellant/insurer could not convince this Court how this amount was on the higher side, this being just and appropriate and therefore, findings to this effect cannot be found fault with.
Validity of the driving license of respondent Bhura Singh driver of the offending vehicle Ex.R1 and Ex.R2 though is sought to be challenged and since onus to prove this aspect was upon the insurer who has not led any evidence and so the report of Divisional Manager RATTAN PAL SINGH 2015.04.10 10:58 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Punjab & Haryana High Court FAO No.2151 of 1996 (O&M) 3 pertaining to the driving license of respondent Bhura Singh Mark D3 and letters of the insurer/appellant Mark D1 and Mark D2 do not come to the aid of the appellant. Since the appellants have failed to lead any evidence to prove this fact onus of which lay upon them, therefore, even findings qua that aspect of the matter do not deserve to be disturbed.
There appears to be no illegality or perversity in the findings of the learned Tribunal and therefore, needs to be upheld and the appeal being hopelessly without any merit stands dismissed.
(FATEH DEEP SINGH) JUDGE December 10, 2014 rps RATTAN PAL SINGH 2015.04.10 10:58 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Punjab & Haryana High Court