IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.625 of 1992 (O&M) Date of decision: 22.02.2011 Bir Devinder Singh ....Appellant versus Sher Khan and others ....Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN ---- Present: Ms. Sukhpreet Kaur, Advocate, for Mr. Amrik Singh Kalra, Advocate, for the appellant. None for respondents 1 and 2 Mr. Paul S. Saini, Advocate, for respondent No.3. ---- 1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? No. 2. To be referred to the reporters or not ? Yes. 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest ? Yes. ---- K.Kannan, J. (Oral) 1. The only point urged in appeal by the claimants to the claim for damages to the car is that the award was restricted to Rs.6,000/- only. While the insurer could have been restricted to its liability to Rs.6,000/-, the claim itself could not have been restricted for the same. The contention is the principal tort feasor and his owner must have been made liable for the amount in excess of what was protected under the terms of policy for the insurer. Learned counsel points out that the evidence had been adduced through a surveyor as regards the extensive damage to the vehicle and the tenability of the claim upto Rs.45,000/-. I FAO No.625 of 1992 (O&M) - 2 - uphold the claim for Rs.45,000/- the amount assessed by the surveyor and hold that the amount in excess of Rs.6,000/- shall be recovered by the claimant against the owner and driver of the offending truck No. PNT-6262, who are arrayed as respondents 1 and 2, with interest at 7.5% from the date of petition till date of payment. 2. The appeal is allowed to the above terms. (K.KANNAN) JUDGE 22.02.2011 sanjeev