F.A.O.No. 1300 of 2003 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH F.A.O.No. 1300 of 2003 Date of decision:5th July, 2010 M/s The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. .......Appellant Versus Kuljeet Kaur and others ........Respondents BEFORE: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.KANNAN Present: Mr. Raj Kumar Bashamboo, Advocate, for the appellant. None for the respondents. 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes/No 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?Yes/No 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Yes/No K.Kannan, J.(Oral) 1. The appeal is by the insurer of scooter when the scooterist was hit by a truck. The claim was made for compensation for death under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicle Act for the case of death of a scooterist involving another vehicle. Owner of the scooter or a person who was riding a borrowed vehicle can have no claim against the owner of the scooter or its insurer. The remedy will be only to file a petition against the other vehicle that caused the accident. 2. In this case the other vehicle which caused the accident resulting in death was the owner of the truck. The claim against the insurer of the scooter was clearly misplaced. The F.A.O.No. 1300 of 2003 2 award of the Tribunal is set aside and the appeal is allowed. 3. The claimants are at liberty to file an appropriate petition for compensation against the owner/insurer of the offending vehicle namely the truck that is alleged to have caused the accident. The bona fide prosecution of the proceedings before the Tribunal and this Court shall be sufficient justification for a fresh petition. If any amount has already been received by the claimants under the award, the same will be duly considered at the time when a fresh petition is to be filed against the owner of the truck and the insurer. [K.KANNAN] JUDGE 5th July, 2010 Shivani Kaushik