IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH

Date of Reserve: November 21, 2025 Date of Pronouncement:-18.12.2025

Date of Uploading:-19.12.2025

Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. ......Appellant(s)

vs.

Raju Singh and others ......Respondent(s)

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA

Present: Mr. Harsh Aggarwal, Advocate

for the appellant.

Mr. Naresh Kaushik, Advocate (Through VC)

for respondent No.1.

Mr. Tarun Sharma, Advocate for

Mr. Saurabh Chawla, Advocate

for respondent No. 2.

Mr. R.S. Khushwaha, Advocate

for respondent No. 3.

Mr. Nigam K. Bhardwaj, Advocate

for respondent No. 5.

****

SUDEEPTI SHARMA J .

1. The present appeal has been preferred by the appellant-Insurance Company against the award dated 13.09.2021 passed in the claim petition bearing CNR No. HRPK01-003348-2017 filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Panchkula (Haryana) (for short, 'the Tribunal’) whereby the claimant was granted compensation to the tune of Rs.3,96,000/- and the Insurance Company was held liable to pay the compensation but no recovery rights were granted to the appellant-Insurance

Company

FACTS NOT IN DISPUTE

2. Brief facts of the case are that on 11.07.2017, Jaspreet Kaur along with other claimants i.e Surender Singh, Raju and others were travelling in the three wheeler bearing registration No. HR-68-B-7394 and were coming from Ravi Dhaba, Jholuwal to village Madhanwala. At about 8:30 A.M, when they reached near village Nanakpur, District Panchkula, in the meanwhile, a Cruzer Taxi bearing registration No. 68-B-6604 being driven by respondent No. 2 rashly and negligently at a very high speed came from opposite side and hit against the three wheeler. Due to the impact of the accident, the claimants and driver of the three wheller fell down on the road. All the claimants received multiple and grievious injuries. FIR No. 224 dated 11.07.2017 was registered at P.S. Pinjore, District Panchkula under Section 279/337/338/427 of IPC regarding this accident.

3. Upon notice of the claim petition, respondents appeared and admitted the factum of compensation.

4. From the pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed by the learned Tribunal :-

“1. Whether the accident in question resulting into the injuries and permanent disability to claimant-injured Jaspreet Kaur, Raju Singh, Surender Singh and Sandeep Singh took place on 11.07.2017 in a the area of Police Station Pinjore on account of rash and negligent driving of respondent No. 2 while driving the Cruiser Taxi bearing registration No. HR-68-B-6604? OPP.

2. If issue No.1 is proved in the affirmative, then what amount of compensation, the claimants of all the claim petitions are entitled to and from whom? OPP

3. Whether the offending cruiser taxi is being plied with contravention of the terms and conditions of the insurance policy as alloeged? OPR-4

4. Relief.”

5. After taking into consideration the pleadings and the evidence on record, the learned Tribunal awarded compensation to the claimant. However, the appellant-Insurance Company was held liable to pay the compensation. Hence, the present appeal.

SUBMISSION OF LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE PARTIES.

6. Learned counsel for the appellant-Insurance Company contends that at the time of the accident the offending vehicle was not having valid route permit. He further contends that non-possession of a valid route permit constitutes fundamental breach of the terms and conditions of the insurance policy. Despite such breach, the learned Tribunal failed to grant recovery rights to the appellant– Insurance Company against the owner of the offending vehicle. He, therefore prays that the present appeal be allowed.

7. Learned counsel for the claimant/respondent No. 1 vehemently contends that the liability has rightly been fixed upon the Insurance Company by the learned Tribunal. He further contends that the amount awarded by the learned Tribunal is on the lower side and the claimant/respondent No. 1 has also filed separate