FAO No.2963 of 2011 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.2963 of 2011 (O&M) Date of Decision. 13.05.2011 Ramandeep Singh s/o Malkiat Singh resident of House No.329, Green City, Zirakpur, Tehsil Dera Bassi, Distt. SAS Nagar, Mohali ......Appellant Versus Sule Amba wife of Tari Karan and another .....Respondents Present: Mr.Parminder Singh Grewal, Advocate for the appellant. CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? No 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not ? No 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? No -.- K. KANNAN J.(ORAL) 1. Delay in filing the appeal is condoned. 2. The award of compensation is made against the appellant finding that he was driving vehicle No.CH-02-0944 at fast speed and hit the child aged 5 ½ years, who succumbed to injuries in the accident. The accident was said to have been personally seen by a person, who was accompanying the child at that time and he had registered a FIR against the driver of the car. The author of the FIR Rajinder was cross- examined at length and the Tribunal had found that there was no inconsistency or contradiction about the version that he had given before the Tribunal. The driver-cum-owner of the car Raman Deep Singh examined himself and stated that he had reached the spot when FAO No.2963 of 2011 (O&M) -2- driving his car and that on the request of the passersby, he took the child to General Hospital, Sector 16, Chandigarh but he has been falsely implicated. The Tribunal did not believe it and found that there was no need for PW-2 to register a false complaint against him. It is essentially a matter of fact and while dealing with the same, the Tribunal had a reason to reject it. The fact that he was acquitted in the criminal case was also irrelevant, for the acquittal had come by the fact that prosecution witnesses could not turn up before the Tribunal to prove the case. Criminal case judgment is not relevant any more than saying that a criminal case was registered against him and if the Tribunal on the basis of independent witnesses had come to the conclusion that the accident had taken place involving the vehicle, I have no reason to take a different view. No other point is argued before me. 3. The award is confirmed and the appeal is dismissed. (K. KANNAN) JUDGE May 13, 2011 Pankaj*