FAO No.217 of 2009 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.217 of 2009 Date of decision: 21.7.2009 Pushpa Devi and others ......Appellant(s) Versus Krishan Murari and others ......Respondent(s) CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG * * * Present: Mr. A.K. Garg, Advocate for the appellants. Rakesh Kumar Garg, J.(Oral) This is claimants' appeal challenging the award dated 19.9.2008 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Patiala whereby claim petition filed by the appellants for grant of compensation on account of death of Surjit Singh caused by rash and negligent driving of respondent No.1 while driving car bearing Registration No.RJ-14-C-7349, was dismissed. As per the claim petition, brief facts of this case are that Surjit Singh deceased suffered injuries on 10.11.2000 in a motor vehicular accident caused by respondent No.1 who was driving his car bearing Registration No.RJ-14-C-7349 in a rash and negligent manner. After the accident, respondent No.1 ran away along with his car. Surjit Singh was taken to Rajindra Hospital, Patiala where he was given treatment and thereafter, he was shifted to PGI, Chandigarh. Ultimately, Surjit Singh died on 31.8.2004. It was further averred that Surjit Singh was a young man of 30 years at the time of his death and was earning Rs.10,000/- per month being a driver with the transport company. FAO No.217 of 2009 2 Despite service, respondents No.1 and 2 did not turn up and were proceeded against ex parte. Respondent No.3 contested the claim petition by filing written statement taking preliminary objections regarding maintainability of the claim petition as the claimants have earlier received compensation to the tune of Rs.1,00,000/- in claim petition No.86T/FTC/10/2.01/13/10/2003 decided on 7.1.2004 by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Patiala. The Tribunal after considering the evidence on record and hearing the arguments, dismissed the claim petition holding that the claimants had failed to prove that Surjit Singh had died due to rash and negligent driving of respondent No.1 while driving Car No.RJ-14-C-7349 on 10.11.2000. It was also held by the Tribunal that injured Surjit Singh had received Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation on account of injuries suffered by him in the accident in question and the claimants have failed to prove that the death of Surjit Singh occurred due to injuries suffered in the accident dated 10.11.2000 and therefore, the claimants were not entitled to claim any compensation. Challenging the impugned award, learned counsel for the appellants has vehemently argued that the factum of accident as well as rash and negligent driving by respondent No.1 has already been proved in the award dated 17.1.2004 and the claimants have proved on the file that Surjit Singh injured had died because of the injuries suffered by him in the aforesaid accident and thus, the appellants are entitled to the compensation on account of death of Surjit Singh as his death was due to the injuries suffered by him in the accident that took place on 10.11.2000. I have heard learned counsel for the appellants and perused the impugned award. While dismissing the claim petition, the Tribunal on FAO No.217 of 2009 3 appreciation of evidence has recorded a finding of fact that there is no evidence to prove that the death of Surjit Singh on 31.8.2004 had occurred due to injuries suffered in the accident that took place on 10.11.2000. Learned counsel for the appellants was unable to point out any material evidence in support of his case which was ignored by the Tribunal while passing the impugned award. In fact, this is a case of absolutely no evidence and there is certainly no evidence to connect the injuries suffered by deceased Surjit Singh in the accident on 10.11.2000 with his cause of death on 31.8.2004. Thus, I find no merit in this appeal. Dismissed. July 21, 2009 (RAKESH KUMAR GARG) ps JUDGE