FAO No.7386 of 2010 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.7386 of 2010 (O&M) Date of decision: 1.11.2011 National Insurance Company Ltd. ....Appellant Versus Kavita and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN Present: Mr.Vandana Malhotra, Advocate for the appellant Mr.Amit Dhawan, Advocate for respondent Nos. 1 and 2 ***** Jitendra Chauhan, J.(Oral) The present appeal has been filed by the appellant-Insurance Company against the award dated 13.10.2010 passed by learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jalandhar (for short 'the Tribunal') vide which an amount of ` 3,14,000/- has been awarded to the claimants- respondent Nos. 1 and 2 on account of death of Sunny Kumar. Brief facts of the case are that on 20.7.2008, Sunny Kumar deceased, alongwith his friend Yogesh Kumar, was coming from village Jandiala to Jalandhar on a motorcycle bearing registration No. PB-08-BC- 3325. When they reached near Bus Stand Kangniwal, a Mini Bus bearing registration No. PB-08Y-6268, being driven by respondent No.3 in a rash and negligent manner, struck against their motorcycle. Due to the collision, FAO No.7386 of 2010 (O&M) 2 he fell down on the road and sustained multiple injuries. He was rushed to the Satyam Hospital, Jalandhar, where he was declared dead. In this regard, FIR No.118 dated 21.7.2008 was registered against Mohinder Singh, driver of the offending vehicle, at Police Station Nurmahal, Jalandhar under Sections 279, 337, 338, 427, 304-A of the Indian Penal Code. Learned counsel for the appellant contends that the learned Tribunal has wrongly held liable the driver of the Mini Bus. Further contends that no eye witness to prove the accident was examined. Respondent No.3, driver of the offending bus, deposed that at the time of the accident, the bus in question was stationery and the deceased in a drunkard condition alongwith his friend came on their motorcycle from the opposite side and hit it. Further contends that respondent No.4- owner of the offending bus corroborated the version of respondent No.3. Further contends that no postmortem was conducted on the dead body of the deceased. On the other hand, learned counsel for respondent Nos. 1 and 2 - claimants contends that the award passed by the learned Tribunal is just and adequate. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record carefully. From perusal of the record, it emerges that the accident is proved on record as per the certified copy of charge sheet Ex.R4, according to which Mohinder Singh- driver of the offending vehicle has been charge sheeted by the trial Court in FIR No. 118 (ibid). Regarding the postmortem, which was not conducted on the dead body of the deceased, this fact was FAO No.7386 of 2010 (O&M) 3 never stated by respondent Nos.3 and 4 i.e. driver and owner respectively in their written reply. Mohinder Singh RW2 and Baljit Singh RW3 have given different versions that 15 boys were coming on five motorcycles at a very high speed and the motorcycle of Sunny Kumar (since deceased) struck against the stationery Mini Bus. In view of the above, no interference is warranted in the well reasoned findings recorded by learned Tribunal. Accordingly, the present appeal fails and the same is dismissed. 1.11.2011 (JITENDRA CHAUHAN) gsv JUDGE