F.A.O.NO. 1851 OF 2005 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH F.A.O.NO. 1851 OF 2005 Date of decision:9th August, 2010 United India Insurance Company Limited .......Appellant Versus Rani and others ........Respondents BEFORE: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.KANNAN Present: Mr. Sanjiv Pabbi, Advocate, for the appellant. None for the respondents. 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes/No 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?Yes/No 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Yes/No K.Kannan, J.(Oral) 1. The Insurance Company is in appeal challenging the award on the ground that there was an act of collision between the claimants and the owner of the vehicle and making it appear as though the insured's vehicle had been involved in the accident, the insured's plea was that the insurance vehicle had not been involved at all and it was some other vehicle which had caused the death of the person which gave rise to the claim for compensation. 2. When the appeal was admitted by the Division Bench of this court on 5.04.2005, it has been admitted the same qua respondent Nos. 5 and 6 only and dismissed the same regarding F.A.O.NO. 1851 OF 2005 2 respondent Nos. 1 to 4. This manner of admission would have the effect of taking away the basis of the claim for the insurer that the insured vehicle was not involved in the accident at all. The Tribunal had already granted the award against the Insurance Company and if it was going to be sustained, it must mean that the insurer cannot urge that the vehicle was not involved in the accident. 3. Even without reference to all technicalities, there has been a basis for the Tribunal to find that the Insured's vehicle was involved by the fact that it was the very same vehicle which had transported the deceased to the hospital, soon after the accident. Indeed, the law itself requires that the driver of the offending vehicle shall ensure immediate first aid and transportation to the hospital to the injured that under Section 134 of the Motor Vehicles Act. Further, in this case when a clear statement had been made against the owner that his vehicle had been involved, one would have expected the driver to be examined. It appears that the driver of the vehicle himself was proceeded against by the police in a criminal case relating to the accident when the Tribunal had applied its mind to analyse the issue on facts which were relevant for finding the involvement of the vehicle in the accident. I see no reason to take a different view. The appeal by the Insurance Company is therefore, dismissed. [K.KANNAN] JUDGE 9th August, 2010 Shivani Kaushik