FAO No.309 of 1988(O&M) [ 1 ] IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ... FAO No.308 of 1988(O&M) Rachhpal Singh and another ... Appellants VERSUS Sunita Jain and others ... Respondents FAO No.309 of 1988(O&M) Narinder Singh and another ... Appellants VERSUS Sheela Devi and others ... Respondents and FAO No.310 of 1988(O&M) Rachhpal Singh and another ... Appellants VERSUS Sarla Jain and others ... Respondents Decided on : September 03, 2009 CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE A.N.JINDAL Present: None for the parties. A.N.JINDAL, J.- This judgment shall dispose of three appeals i.e. FAO Nos.308 FAO No.309 of 1988(O&M) [ 2 ] to 310 of 1988, arising out of the award dated 1.12.1987, whereby, the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Patiala awarded compensation as follows:- MACT Case No.20/1987 “Sheela Devi etc. vs. Narinder Singh etc.” - Compensation to the tune of Rs.1,92,000/-. MACT Case No.23/1987 “Sarla Jain etc. vs. Rachhpal Singh and others” and MACT Case No.31/1987 “Sunita Jain etc. vs. Rachhpal Singh etc.” - Total compensation of Rs.1,84,000/-; Sarla Jain and Ram Sarup Jain, who are claimants No.1 and 2 in MACT No.23, were held entitled to Rs.30,000/- with proportionate interest and Sunita Jain, widow and Shafali Jain, the minor daughter, who are claimants in MACT No.31 were held entitled to Rs.54,000 and 1,00,000/-, respectively. The appeals have been preferred by Rachhpal Singh and Narinder Singh, who are driver and owner of offending truck No.DEG- 5435, respectively as the award has been passed against them (appellants) and the respondent – Insurance Company jointly and severally. The Tribunal while observing that since the liability of the appellants is covered by the Insurance Policy only to the extent of Rs.1,50,000/-, held that the Insurance Company would be liable to indemnify the payment of compensation to that extent. However, rest of the compensation amount was to be paid by the appellants. The instant appeals have been preferred by the appellants to get rid of their liability as held by the Tribunal. FAO No.309 of 1988(O&M) [ 3 ] It is apparent from the records that since the policy issued to the appellants could cover the compensation only upto Rs.1,50,000/-, therefore, the Insurance Company – respondent was liable to that extent only. No grounds to interfere. Appeals dismissed. September 03, 2009 ( A.N.JINDAL ) `gian' JUDGE