FAO No. 886 of 1990 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH FAO No. 886 of 1990 Date of decision February 17, 2011 Krishan Kumar ....... Appellant Versus Madan Singh and others ........Respondents FAO No.922 of 1990 Krishan Kumar ....... Appellant Versus Madan Singh and others ........Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN Present:- None for the appellant. None for respondent Nos.1 and 2. Mr. R. K. Bashamboo, Advocate for respondent No.3. **** 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. Both the appeals are connected and are disposed of by a common order. 2. FAO No.886 of 1990 is by the owner of the car bearing registration No. DDA 3886. The collision had taken place on the National High Way-I at 7.25 P.M. There were claim petitions arising out of FAO No. 886 of 1990 2 the same accident. Four persons had been injured who were travelling in the Maruti Van and the appellant was a claimant for damage to the Car. The Tribunal held that the accident had been caused only by the negligence of the driver of the Car and the personal injuries on the passengers in the van had occurred only on account of such negligent driving. While the claim petitions for death and injuries had been awarded in favour of the persons who were passengers in the van, consistent with its finding regarding the negligence of the driver of the Car, the petition for damage to the Car was dismissed. 3. The appeal is against such a finding. There is no representation on behalf of the appellant at the time when the matter is called. The case pertains to the year 1990 and it cannot merely await the arrival of the counsel. I have examined the records. I find no error in the approach made by the Tribunal as regards the appreciation of issue of negligence. The appeal is dismissed. 4. FAO No. 922 of 1990 is by the very same appellant against the award dismissing the claim for personal injuries suffered by him. I have already held that the negligence was on the part of the appellant himself. In terms of the judgment in the connected case, this appeal is also dismissed. (K. KANNAN) JUDGE February 17, 2011 archana