IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.1761 of 2000 (O&M) Date of decision:30.09.2010 National Insurance Company Limited ....Appellant versus Smt. Kanta Devi and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN ----- Present: Mr. Balbir Singh Wasu, Advocate, for the appellant. Mr. S.P. Singh, Advocate, for Mr. Amit Rawal, Advocate, for the respondents. ----- 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 Insurance Company for the milk van, which had collided with the another vehicle i.e. Matador van insured with the Oriental Insurance Company, has come in appeal to point out that the Tribunal has found the vehicle insured with the Oriental Insurance Company to be rash and negligent but has apportioned the liability as 50:50. It is elsewhere observed that the liability of the respective vehicles namely of the appellant's vehicle and the Oriental Insurance Company's vehicle was 40:60 but in the ultimate award, it has distributed the liability equally. I find that it was a case of head-on collision and an equal apportionment ought not to be subject for intervention normally. FAO No.1761 of 2000 (O&M) - 2 - However, in the light of the Tribunal's observation that the matador van was primarily responsible for the accident, the liability must have been loaded slightly higher for the driver and owner matador van and consequently on Oriental Insurance Company and marginally reduced for the liability of the milk van driver and the insurer/appellant. 2. The award of the Tribunal is, therefore, modified casting the liability of the Insurance Company of the appellant at 40% and taking the liability of the Oriental Insurance Company at 60%. 3. The appeal is allowed to the above extent only. (K.KANNAN) JUDGE 30.09.2010 sanjeev