SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(P&H) 525

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Harkesh Manuja, J.
National Insurance Co. Ltd. & Ors. – Appellants
Versus
Sajalpreet Kaur & Ors. – Respondents
FAO-287-2018 (O&M) and FAO-2689 of 2018
Decided On : 09-01-2023

Advocates appeared:
Mr.Anish Bansal, Advocate, Mr.Deepak Suri, Advocate with Mr. Neeraj Khanna, Advocate, for the Appellant; Mr. Sumit Kadyan, Advocate, for Mr. G.S Madan, Advocate, for the Respondent

The main legal point established in the judgment is the liability of the insurance company under a comprehensive policy in case of injury or death of the owner/driver/occupant of a vehicle, as well as the assessment of negligence and compensation under various heads.

Headnote:

Condonation of Delay - Motor Accident Claims - National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Sajalpreet Kaur and others - CIVIL APPEAL NO. 8163 OF 2012, 2021 (4) R.C.R. (Civil) 71 - The court discussed the condonation of delay in filing appeals and the legal provisions related to insurance liability in case of injury or death of the owner/driver/occupant of a vehicle under a comprehensive policy. The court also highlighted the interpretation of negligence on the part of the driver and the assessment of compensation under various heads.

Fact of the Case:

The case involved two appeals related to a road accident resulting in the death of Gurpreet Singh. The court considered the liability of the insurance company, the negligence of the driver, and the quantum of compensation awarded by the tribunal.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the insurance company was liable to pay compensation under a comprehensive policy, disregarding the argument that the owner of the offending vehicle was not impleaded as a respondent. The court also concluded that negligence on the part of the driver was established and reassessed the quantum of compensation under various heads.

Issues: The issues included the liability of the insurance company, the establishment of negligence on the part of the driver, and the assessment of compensation under different heads.

Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the interpretation of the insurance policy, the assessment of negligence, and the reassessment of compensation under various heads.

Final Decision: The court disposed of the appeals by affirming the liability of the insurance company under a comprehensive policy, establishing negligence on the part of the driver, and reassessing the quantum of compensation under different heads.

JUDGMENT

Harkesh Manuja, J. -

CM-891-CII-2018 in FAO-287-2018

1. This is an application seeking condonation of delay of 9 days in filing the appeal.

2. For the reasons mentioned in the application, which is supported by an affidavit, sufficient cause has been shown for condoning the delay on account of transition of file at different places, thus, the same is allowed and delay of 9 days in filing the appeal is condoned.

CM-890-CII-2018 in FAO-287-2018

3. This is an application seeking condonation of delay of 8 days in re-filing the appeal.

4. For the reasons mentioned in the application, which is supported by an affidavit, sufficient cause has been shown for condoning the delay, thus, the same is allowed and delay of 8 days in re-filing the appeal is condoned.

CM-9888-CII-2018 in FAO-2689-2018

This is an application seeking condonation of delay of 176 days in filing the appeal.

5. For the reasons mentioned in the application, which is supported by an affidavit, sufficient cause has been shown for condoning the delay on account of ill-health of the mother of the deceased, thus, the same is allowed and delay of 176 days in filing the appeal is condoned.

MAIN CASE:

6. This order of mine shall dispose of two appeals bearing FAO No. 287 of 2018 titled as National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Sajalpreet Kaur and others (filed by Insurance Company for setting aside the award) and another bearing FAO No. 2689 of 2018 titled as Sajalpreet Kaur and others Vs. National Insurance Co. Ltd. and others (filed by claimants/appellants for enhancement of compensation).

For convenience, the facts are taken from FAO No. 287 of 2018 i.e. the appeal filed on behalf of the Insurance Company.

7. Brief facts of the case are that on 12.06.2014, deceased Gurpreet Singh was travelling with respondent No.6 / driver Satnam Singh in car bearing registration number PB-11-BG-8867 (hereinafter referred as offending vehicle) when it struck against a pillar and Gurpreet Singh succumbed to his injuries. DDR regarding this incident was registered at police station Lahori Gate, Patiala by respondent No.6 / driver Satnam Singh. Vehicle in question was owned by Dharminder Kaur, who also happens to be the wife of deceased.

8. A claim petition was filed on behalf of the dependants of deceased, including her wife Dharminder Kaur, before the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Patiala (in brevity, 'the Tribunal') seeking compensation on account of death of Gurpreet Singh. Learned Tribunal in view of the statement of CW2-Saleem Khan, who was eye-witness to the accident, held that accident was caused due to the rash and negligent driving of respondent No.6 / driver, especially considering the fact that he never appeared before the learned Tribunal to record his statement. Further, on the basis of documentary proof of pay slip of deceased, corroborated by the testimony of CW3- Dinesh Mehta, learned Tribunal assessed his monthly income at the rate Rs. 70,109/- per month and awarded compensation in the following manner:

S.No

Heads of Claim

Amount (in Rs)

1.

Loss of dependency

Rs.82,03,104/-

2.

Funeral expenses

Rs.25,000/-

3.

Medical Expenses

Rs.23,937/-

4.

Loss of love and affection

Rs.1,00,000/-

 

Total

Rs. 83,52,041/-

9. One of the grounds taken by the appellant/ Insurance Company before learned Tribunal was that in this case, wife of deceased was also a claimant, while being owner of the offending vehicle she should have been respondent in the present case. In this context, learned Tribunal held that initially, an application was made on her behalf, for deletion of her name as claimants and for impleading her as respondent, however that application was dismissed by the learned Tribunal as it was presented at the fag end of the case. It was further held that though wife/owner was not dependent upon deceased, however claimants who were the children of deceased, being legal representatives as well as dependents, were entitled to get compensation on account of his death in road accident.

10. It is the said award

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top