IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH XOBJC-60-2022 (O&M)

THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. ......Appellant vs.

RADHA RANI AND ORS. ......Respondents Reserved on:- 11.12.2025 Pronounced on:- 10.02.2026 Uploaded on:- 10.02.2026 Whether only the operative part of the judgment is pronounced?NO Whether full judgment is pronounced? YES CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA Present: Ms. Sandeep Suri, Advocate for the appellant-Insurance Company.

Mr. Ajay Jain, Advocate for respondents No.1 to 3/cross-objectors.

****

SUDEEPTI SHARMA J.

1. Vide this common judgment, this Court, shall dispose of the appeal filed by the appellant-Insurance Company as well as cross-objections filed by the cross-objectors/claimants.

FAO-3007-2022

2. The present appeal has been preferred by Insurance Company against award dated 11.01.2022 passed by learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sirsa, Haryana (in short ‘Tribunal’), whereby, the claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 filed by respondents No.1 to 3 has been allowed.

3. The present cross-objections has been preferred by respondent No.1 to 3/cross-objectors/claimants against the award dated 11.01.2022 passed in the claim petition filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sirsa, Haryana for enhancement of compensation, granted to respondent Nos.1 to 3/claimants to the tune of Rs.45,40,950/- along with interest @ 6% per annum on account of death of deceased-Jitender Singh in a motor vehicular accident, occurred on 23.06.2018.

BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE

4. Brief facts of the case are that on 23.06.2018, Jitender Kumar (since deceased) had gone for morning walk towards Hanumangarh Road side and when he reached near New Jagjit Janta Agro Industries Works, Ellenabad, then the driver of unknown vehicle hit his vehicle into Jitender Kumar from behind and caused the accident and Jitender Kumar sustained serious and grievous injuries on his person. On account of the injuries Jitender Kumar died at the spot. A case FIR No.157 dated 23.06.2018 under Sections 279, 337 and 304-A IPC was registered on the statement of Sanjay Kumar son of Shri Om Parkash. The said accident was witnessed by Atma Ram son of Shri Harpal, resident of Ellenabad who was also on morning walk on the said road on 23.06.2018 and disclosed the said fact of accident to police on 25.06.2018 to the effect that at the time of morning walk when he reached near Durga Mandir, then one white Zen Car No.PB-61B/0271 being driven by Ram Lal, respondent no.1 met him and said “Ram Ram” to him and then gone towards his house. On the day of accident, he approached him and disclosed that in the morning near Jagjit Janta Agro Industries, Ellenabad accident has taken place with his car and in the said accident Jitender Kumar Khatri of Ellenabad has died. He disclosed the said fact to police and then respondent no.1 was arrested in this case and challaned by the police.

5. From the pleadings of the parties, the Tribunal framed the following issues:-

“1. Whether the accident in question took place due to rash and negligent driving of driver of Zen car bearing registration no.PB-61B-271 as alleged in the petition?OPP.

2. If issue no.1 is proved, whether petitioners are entitled for any compensation on account of death of deceased Jitender, if so to what amount and from whom?OPP

3. Whether this petition is not maintainable in the present form?OPR. 4. Relief. ”

SUBMISSIONS OF LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE PARTIES

6. Learned counsel for the appellant contends that factum of accident is not proved still learned Tribunal has granted compensation to the respondents. He further contends that even the income of the deceased assessed by learned Tribunal is on the higher side. He therefore, prays that the present appeal be allowed.

7. Per contra, learned counsel for respondents contends that learned Tribunal has rightly decided issue No.1, wherein, the respondents are able to prove the factum o