IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.1571 of 1992 (O&M) Date of decision:27.01.2011 Rajesh ....Appellant versus Smt. Krishna Devi and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN ---- Present: Nemo. ---- 1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2. To be referred to the reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest ? ---- K.Kannan, J.(Oral) 1. The case is of the year 1992 and there is no appearance for either side at the time when the matter is called. I notice from the records that the appeal was admitted on 04.11.1992 and no stay had also been granted. I see no purpose in letting the case remain on board and, therefore, I proceed to dispose of the case on merits. 2. The appeal is by the owner of the vehicle in a case where there had been no insurance and award had been passed for death of a person, who had left behind his widow, a minor daughter and two minor sons. The compensation awarded was Rs.1,70,000/-. 3. The accident was said to have taken place when the deceased had got into a tempo that belonged to the appellant, which capsized and several passengers including the deceased had suffered FAO No.1571 of 1992 (O&M) - 2- injuries, but it proved to be fatal for the first claimant's husband. 4. Considering the defence that the vehicle was not at all involved in the accident, the Tribunal found that even the statement of RW1 that Tribunal had taken the tempo to attend the marriage of some close acquaintance was contradictory to the contention raised in the statement that he did not ply the vehicle on the day. The Tribunal also rejected the evidence of RW2-Rajinder, who stated that the vehicle had not been taken out on that day and that they had not gone to the marriage. The Tribunal, however, found the evidence of PW3-Ramu, who was a Sarpanch of the village, as trustworthy and held that the accident would have taken place only by the involvement of the vehicle and that he had died only by the rash and negligent driving of the appellant's driving. 5. The deceased was a bachelor and the income assessed by the Tribunal was Rs.1,500/-. In the manner of determination of compensation, the assessment was modest and I find no reason to interfere with the same. 6. The appeal is dismissed confirming the award. (K.KANNAN) JUDGE 27.01.2011 sanjeev