IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

1.FAO-2802-2009 (O&M)

Ravinderjit Kaur ..Appellant Versus Saranjit Singh and others ..Respondents

2.FAO-2803-2009 (O&M)

Ravinderjit Kaur ..Appellant Versus Saranjit Singh and others ..Respondents

3.FAO-2487-2009 (O&M)

Pepsu Road Transport Corporation, Patiala ..Appellant Versus Saranjit Singh and others ..Respondents Reserved on : 16.09.2025 Date of decision:19.09.2025 CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANDEEP PANNU Present: FAO-2802-2009 Mr. Sandeep K Sharma, Advocate and Mr. Utsav Sharma, Advocate for the appellant None for respondent No.1 Mr. Aman Sharma, Advocate for respondent No.2 Service of respondent No.3 was dispensed with vide order dated 12.12.2011 FAO-2803-2009 Mr. Sandeep K Sharma, Advocate and Mr. Utsav Sharma, Advocate for the appellant None for respondent No.1 Service of respondent No.2 was dispensed with vide order dated 12.12.2011.

Mr. Aman Sharma, Advocate for respondent No.3 FAO-2487-2009 Mr.Aman Sharma, Advocate for the appellant None for respondent No.1 Service of respondent No.2 was dispensed with vide order dated 12.12.2011 in cross-appeal Mr. Sandeep K Sharma, Advocate and Mr. Utsav Sharma, Advocate for respondent No.3 MANDEEP PANNU, J.

1. By this common judgment, three First Appeals against award dated 22.10.2008 i.e FAO-2802-2009, FAO-2803-2009 and FAO-2487-2009 shall stand disposed of.

2. FAO-2802-2009 and FAO-2803-2009 have been filed by Ravinderjit Kaur, one of the claimants before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ropar (hereinafter referred to as ‘Tribunal’) whereas FAO-2487-2009 has been filed by Pepsu Road Transport Corporation, Patiala (hereinafter referred to as ‘PRTC’). The Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs.10,60,000/- on account of death of Tejinder Singh, in a vehicular accident, which took place on 10.01.2004. Two claim petitions were filed before the Tribunal; one on behalf of appellant-Ravinderjit Kaur (wife of deceased) and another by Saranjit Singh(son of deceased) -respondent no.1 in all three appeals.

3. In FAO-2487-2009 filed by PRTC-appellant challenge has been made to the accident being caused by rash and negligent driving of vehicle owned by PRTC and it is prayed that compensation awarded is excessive and needs to be re-determined.

4. Learned counsel for PRTC has submitted that Tribunal has erred in recording that accident took place due to rash and negligent driving of Narinderpal Singh, Driver of offending bus as no independent evidence was led by the claimants to prove the accident and negligence of the driver. He has further submitted that credibility of eye-witness Harvinderpal Singh is doubtful, being brother-in-law of deceased. Furthermore, submitted that Tribunal has ignored the statement of Driver-Narinderpal Singh (RW1) wherein he has stated that deceased struck his car against the stationery bus, while overtaking a scooterist and it’s a case of contributory negligence which resulted in head on collision.

5. This Court, after giving due consideration to the facts of the case and also to the detailed findings recorded by the Tribunal with regard to the accident, finds no merit in the contention of the learned counsel for PRTC. PW1 Harvinder Pal Singh, an eye witness has made a detailed statement with regard to time, place and manner of accident. He himself has suffered multiple grievous injuries in the said accident. RW1-Narinderpal Singh, Driver of the offending vehicle has made the following statement:-

“On 10.1.2004, I was driving bus No. PB-11-

A-9265. I was going on Ropar Nalagarh route, on that day I left the bus stand Ropar, while driving the above said bus at 4:50 P.M on that day. When I reached the small bridge in the area of Village Malikpur, one scooter was seen coming from the opposite direction and one car was following the said scooter and the car driver was giving the horn to the scooterist to over take the same. My bus had already entered the small bridge. When the car overtake the scooter, immediately I applie