FAO No.3387 of 1999 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH FAO No.3387 of 1999 Date of decision March 1, 2011 Amarjeet and others ....... Appellants Versus Amrik Singh and others ........Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN Present:- Mr. Sandeep Bansal, Advocate for Mr. Arun Bansal, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. Ramswaroop , Advocate and Mr. Inderjeet Sharma, Advocate for the Insurance Company. **** 1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? No 2. To be referred to the reporters or not? No 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest?No K. Kannan, J (oral). 1. The appeal is for enhancement for claim of compensation for death of a minor girl aged 17. The accident was said to have taken place when she was sitting as a pillion rider on a motor cycle driven by her father. The motor cycle hit against a cow and she fell down and at that time the insurer's van had run over her and crushed her to death. The Tribunal found that negligence had not been established and the evidence brought out through DDR itself revealed that there was no rashness or negligence on the part of the driver of the Maruti Van. 2. The father had himself joined in filing the petition along with his wife claiming compensation. If the initial fall from the motor FAO No.3387 of 1999 2 cycle was resultant to the claimant's own negligence, to that extent there shall be an abatement to claim. I cannot take the accident to be resultant to the father's negligence in full. The insurer's driver must take the responsibility for it was his driving of the van that crushed her to death. I will attribute 50% responsibility for the Insurer's driver. Having regard to the fact that the case is of the year 1996, I would take a compensation of `1,50,000/- as appropriate and make 50% abatement while assessing compensation payable by the insured and the insurer at `75,000/-. The Tribunal had already made the respondent liable to `50,000/-. There shall be an additional liability of `25,000/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of payment. The additional amount shall be distributed equally amongst the claimants. The appeal is allowed to the above extent. (K. KANNAN) JUDGE March 1, 2011 archana