IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA FAO(MVA) No.133 of 2013 Reserved on: 02.03.2026 Date of decision: 09.03.2026 _______________________________________________________

Jaswinder Singh ...Appellant Versus Nirmala Devi and others …Respondents ________________________________________________________

Coram Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sushil Kukreja, Judge

1 Whether approved for reporting?

____________________________________________________

For the appellant: Mr. B.S. Thakur, Advocate.

For the respondents: Mr. Ashok K. Tyagi & Ms. Divya Rajta, Advocates, respondents No.1 to 5.

Mr. Deepak Bhasin, Senior Advocate with Mr. Sambhav Bhasin and Ms.Shruti Dubey, Advocates, for respondent No.6.

Sushil Kukreja, Judge The instant appeal is maintained by the appellant/ Owner H(hereinafter referred to as “the appellant”), under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act (for short “MV Act”), against the award dated 29.09.2012, passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-I, Sirmaur District at Nahan, H.P., in MAC Petition No.87-MAC/2 of 2008, with a prayer to quash and set aside the impugned award.

2. Brief facts of the case, giving rise to present appeal, are that the petitioners/respondents No.1 to 5 herein (hereinafter referred to

1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

as the petitioners) filed a claim petition under Section 166 of MV Act, whereby they sought compensation to the tune of Rs.20,00,000/- on account of death of Shri Som Nath, who was husband of petitioner No.1, father of petitioners No.2 to 4 and son of petitioner No.5. It was averred by the petitioners that on 26.09.2008, S om Nath was travlling as pillion rider on Motorcycle bearing registration No.HP-18A-2251, being driven by one Ranjeet Singh. When they reached near Petrol Pump at Kala Amb, a Tractor bearing registration No.HR-04B-3540 came from the opposite udirection, being driven in rash and negligent manner by its drivoer (proforma respondent No.7 herein) and struck against Som Nath, as a result of which, he suffered serious injuries and died on the way of hospital.

3. hAs per the petitioners, at the time of his death, the gdeceased was 44 years old and he was working as a Fitter in IPH iDepartment and was drawing monthly salary of Rs.10,000/-. He was also earning Rs.3,000/- per month from the agriculture. The offending vehicle was owned by Jaswinder Singh (appellant herein) and it was insured with National Insurance Company Ltd. (respondent No.6 herein). It was also averred that the deceased was the only earning member in the family. Hence, the petitioners sought compensation to the tune of Rs.20,00,000/-.

4. The owner as well as driver of the offending vehicle (appellant and proforma respondent No.7 herein) in their joint reply to the claim petition raised preliminary objection regarding non-joinder of necessary parties. On merits, it has been averred that the accident had taken place due to the rash and negligent dr iving on the part of the driver of motorcycle and the deceased had never struck against the Tractor. They further averred that the Tractor in question was duly insured with National Insurance Company/respondent No.6 herein.

5. In the repluy filed by National Insurance Company/ respondent No.6 heorein , preliminary objections were taken regarding maintainability, driver of the Tractor was not having a valid and effective driving licence, the Tractor was being driven in contravention of tehrms and conditions of insurance policy. On merits, it was denied gthat he was earning Rs.3,000/- per month from agricultural work and ithat there was longevity in the family of the deceased.

6. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the learned Tribunal below framed the following issues on 21.10.2009:-

“1. Whether Som Nath died on account of rash or negligent driving of tractor HR-04B-3540 by respondent No.3- Ram Babu Paswan alias Lal Babu, as alleged? OPP

2. In case issue No.1 is proved in affirmative, to what amount of compensation the pe