FAO No. 1316 of 2009 -1- In the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh Date of decision : 29.4.2010 1. F. A. O. No. 1316 of 2009 (O&M) National Insurance Company Limited ... Appellant vs Dalbir and others .... Respondents 2. F. A. O. No. 1317 of 2009 and Cross-objection No. 78-CII of 2009 (O&M) National Insurance Company Limited ... Appellant vs Babita alias Baby and others .... Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present: Mr. Paul S. Saini, Advocate, for the appellant. Mr. Jaswant Jain, Advocate, for the cross-objectors/claimants in FAO No. 1317 of 2009. Rajesh Bindal J. This order shall dispose of aforementioned appeals as well as the cross-objections as the same arise out of one accident. The appellant- insurance company has challenged the award passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Hisar (hereinafter to be referred as “the Tribunal”), whereby the appellant insurance company was directed to deposit the compensation amount first and thereafter recover the same from the owner of the offending vehicle, whereas claimants/ cross-objectors in FAO No. 1317 of 2009 are seeking further enhancement of compensation. The facts are extracted from FAO No. 1316 of 2009. Briefly the facts as stated in the award of the learned Tribunal are that on 21.12.2003 Bhagat Singh along with Dalbir Singh was coming from Hansi to Hisar in Jeep No. HR-62/0520. Subhash respondent no. 2 was driving the jeep in a rash and negligent manner. When they reached about ¾ k.m. from Hansi to Hisar side on the G. T. Road, respondent no. 2 struck the jeep in an accidental truck which was standing on the road. Due to this impact, Dalbir Singh received serious injuries whereas Bhagat Singh succumbed to his injuries. FIR was registered in Police Station, City Hansi. The claimants filed petitions before the learned Tribunal seeking compensation, which were allowed vide common award dated 10.11.2008 and insurance company was directed to deposit the compensation FAO No. 1316 of 2009 -2- amount first and thereafter recover the same from the owner of the offending vehicle. It is this finding which is impugned by the insurance company in the appeals whereas the dependents of deceased Bhagat Singh are seeking further enhancement by filing the cross-objections. At the very outset learned counsel for the claimants/objectors submitted that the cross-objections filed by them be dismissed as not pressed. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that owner of the offending vehicle found responsible for the accident and in that circumstances, the directions of the learned Tribunal to it to satisfy the award first are perverse and deserve to be quashed. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and perused the paper book. Admittedly, the offending vehicle was insured and the driver of the offending vehicle was having valid licence. The learned Tribunal has not absolved the owner of the offending vehicle from his liability for paying the compensation. For the fault of the driver of the offending vehicle, the claimants cannot made to suffer due to the inter-se dispute between the owner and insurance company as the vehicle was insured. Moreover, the recovery rights have been given to the insurance company to recover the same from the owner of the vehicle. In view of the above, no interference is called for with the impugned award. Accordingly, the appeals as well as the cross-objections are dismissed. 29.4.2010 ( Rajesh Bindal) vs Judge