FAO No.3215 of 2011(O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.3215 of 2011(O&M) Date of decision: 26.4.2011 Future Generali India Insurance Company Ltd. ......Appellant(s) Versus Smt.Saroj Bala w/o Jagmal Singh and others ......Respondent(s) CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG * * * Present: Mr. Ashwani Talwar, Advocate for the appellant. Rakesh Kumar Garg, J.(Oral) This is insurer's appeal against the impugned award whereby the claimant-respondents No.1 and 2 have been awarded compensation for a sum of ` 1,00,000/- on the basis of a clause in the policy. Admittedly, as per policy, the extra premium was paid for covering personal insurance of the owner/driver to the extent of ` 1,00,000/- . While allowing the claim of respondents No.1 and 2, the Tribunal has recorded a finding of fact that the deceased was deemed to have stepped into the shoes of the registered owner and therefore, the Insurance Company was liable to pay compensation to the extent of ` 1,00,000/- for personal insurance, arising out of the contractual obligation. In fact, Mr. Ashwani Talwar, learned counsel for the appellant, has not disputed the aforesaid finding of the Tribunal regarding liability of the appellant to pay ` 1,00,000/- as compensation, however, his contention before this Court is that the owner of the vehicle has also filed a claim application which is still pending and thus, there may not be any duplication of the award against the appellant. Admittedly, no error can be found in the findings recorded by FAO No.3215 of 2011(O&M) 2 the Tribunal in this case. It was for the appellant to make an application before the Tribunal to get both the cases consolidated at an appropriate stage in which it has failed. The appellant cannot derive any benefit of its own wrong. Therefore, this Court is not impressed by the argument raised by the learned counsel for the appellant, hence contention is rejected. No other point is urged. Dismissed. April 26, 2011 (RAKESH KUMAR GARG) ps JUDGE