F.A.O. No.3897 of 2008 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** F.A.O. No.3897 of 2008 Date of Decision:03.11.2008 National Insurance Company Limited, Ambala .....Appellant Vs. Smt. Shanti Devi and others .....Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARBANS LAL Present:- Mr. Ravinder Arora, Advocate for the appellant. **** HARBANS LAL, J. This appeal is directed against the award dated 7.8.2008 passed by the Motor Accident Claims, Tribunal, Ambala vide which by allowing the claim petition partly, an amount of Rs.2,49,000/- has been awarded as compensation to the claimants along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of realisation. The brief facts giving rise to the claim petition are that on 10.12.1006 Ashok Kumar was proceeding from Jagadhri to Khizrabad on a new unnumbered motor cycle at a moderate speed followed by his brother- in-law Sunil Kumar on a separate motor cycle bearing registration No.HR- 01-6571. At about 10:30/11:00 A.M., when they went a little ahead of Chachrauli Town, they noticed a tractor/ trolley bearing registration No. HR-02-N-7158 coming from the opposite direction being driven by Raj Kumar, respondent rashly and negligently. Raj Kumar, respondent lost control over his vehicle and collided with the motor cycle being driven by Ashok Kumar. As a result of the impact of collusion, Ashok Kumar fell F.A.O. No.3897 of 2008 -2- down on the road and sustained injuries. Sunil Kumar who was following him, rushed him to Kohli Hospital, Jagadhri in Tata Sumo from where he was referred to Civil Hospital, Jagdhari from where he was referred to Civil Hospital, Yamuna Nagar. Then he was referred to PGI, Chandigarh. When he was being taken to PGI, he succumbed to the injuries. On these allegations, the claimants filed the claim petition claiming compensation to the tune of Rs.10 lacs on account of the death of Ashok Kumar. In their written statement, the respondents resisted the claim petition. The issues were framed by the learned Tribunal. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and examining the evidence on record, the learned Tribunal passed the award as noticed at the outset. I have heard the learned counsel for the appellant, besides perusing the findings returned by the learned Tribunal with due care and circumspection. Mr. Ravinder Arora, Advocate appearing on behalf of the appellant urged with a good deal of force that as a matter of fact, the deceased had died on account of his own rash and negligent driving. Raj Kumar, respondent was driving the offending tractor at a moderate speed and thus the award is liable to be set aside. These contentions are unsustainable. FIR, copy of which is Mark `A' as well as the report under Section 173 of Cr.P.C, copy of which is Mark `C' tend to show that the accident occurred on account of reckless and ruthless driving on the part of Raj Kumar, respondent. The age of the deceased was 29 years at the time of accident. The income of the deceased has been taken to be Rs.3,000/- being an unskilled worker. 13 has been F.A.O. No.3897 of 2008 -3- applied as multiplier. Thus, obviously, no fault can be found with the findings recorded by the learned Tribunal. Seuqelly, this appeal being devoid of any merit is dismissed. November 03, 2008 ( HARBANS LAL ) renu JUDGE