Punjab-Haryana High Court
State Of Punjab And Ors vs Pooja Devi And Others on 12 September, 2014
Author: Rekha Mittal
Bench: Rekha Mittal
FAO-6297-2014(O&M) 1
IN THE PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH
FAO-6297-2014(O&M)
Date of decision : 12.09.2014
State of Punjab and others
... Appellants
Versus
Pooja Devi and others
... Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE REKHA MITTAL
Present: Mr.B.S.Sra, Addl. A.G.Punjab.
REKHA MITTAL, J.(ORAL)
The present appeal lays challenge to the award dated 28.10.2013 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Hoshiarpur (in short 'the Tribunal') awarding compensation to the dependents of Randhir Singh (deceased) and liability has been fastened upon the State of Punjab as the bus bearing No.PB-08AZ-9169 belongs to PUNBUS.
Counsel for the appellant has sought to assail liability of the appellants primarily on two counts. It is submitted that as per the case set up by the claimant, Randhir Singh deceased was sitting on left mudguard of Mahindera Arjan Tractor when the occurrence took place. It is further argued that as mudguard of the tractor is not meant for carrying a passenger, the appellants are not liable to pay compensation.
Another submission made by counsel is that in view of averments set up in the petition and evidence led on record, the bus hit another tractor make Swaraj 855 which was loaded with sugarcane and the DAVINDER KUMAR 2014.09.30 11:09 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document FAO-6297-2014(O&M) 2 said Swaraj 855 hit Mohindera Arjan Tractor on which the deceased was travelling. It is argued that no liability in regard to payment of compensation has been fastened against the owner, driver and insurer of Swaraj 855 when otherwise said vehicle cannot escape its liability for composite negligence in the occurrence in question.
I have heard counsel for the appellants and perused the records. Apart from the fact that the appeal is barred by limitation, I do not find any merit in the contention raised by counsel for the appellant. Randhir Singh is a third party qua other two vehicles which hit each other and thereafter hit Mohindera Arjan Tractor on which the deceased was sitting. Under these circumstances, the appellants cannot escape their liability on the ground that the deceased was sitting on mudguard of the tractor.
So far as the plea with regard to composite negligence of two vehicles is concerned, the claimants have the option to recover the compensation from either of them and even the learned Tribunal is not obliged to decide the extent of negligence attributable to those two vehicles for the purpose of compensation. In this context, reference can be made to judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court of India in The New India Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Darshana Devi and others, VOL.CLI-(2008-
3) The Punjab Law Reported 471.
For the reasons aforesaid, the appeal is dismissed in limine.
(REKHA MITTAL) JUDGE September 12, 2014.
Davinder Kumar DAVINDER KUMAR 2014.09.30 11:09 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document