IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Iffco Tokio General Insurance Co. Ltd. ......Appellant vs.

Rakshi Minor Through his natural guardian & ors. ......Respondents Date of Reserve: 11.02.2026 Date of Pronouncement: 13.02.2026 Uploaded on:- 16.02.2026 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: Mr. Sachin Ohri, Advocate for the appellant.

Mr. Ashish Gupta, Advocate for respondent No. 2.

****

SUDEEPTI SHARMA J.

1. The present appeal has been preferred by the appellant-Insurance Company against the award dated 12.05.2017 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Karnal in the claim petition filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short, 'the Tribunal’)on the ground that the liability to pay compensation to the tune of Rs. 2,53,200/- has been wrongly fixed upon the Insurance Company.

FACTS NOT IN DISPUTE

2. Brief facts of the case are that on 30.4.2015 Rakshit (minor) along with his father and cousin namely Sagar was going to Karna Lake, Karnal, for excursion on motorcycle bearing registration No.HR-05W-8946 being driven by his father, whereas he along with his cousin was travelling as pillion riders. At about 2:15 p.m., when they reached G.T. Road and were approaching towards old road of Karna Lake, Karnal, in the meantime offending vehicle being driven by respondent No.1 in rash and negligent manner came from Chandigarh side and while moving on the wrong side hit against motorcycle, as a result of which, occupants of motorcycle fell on the road and sustained injuries on their persons. Even though father and cousin of injured-petitioner had sustained minor injuries, whereas injured-petitioner had sustained grievous head injury. After causing accident, respondent No.1 stopped the offending vehicle but after some time he fled away towards Karnal side. Immediately after the accident, Rakshit (minor) was taken to Civil Hospital, Karnal, where he was medico-legally examined and thereafter on the same day he was referred to Arvind Hospital, Karnal, where he remained admitted till 27.5.2015 and his treatment as outdoor patient is still continuing from above said hospital. As accident had taken place due to sole rash and negligent driving of offending vehicle by respondent No.1. thus, on these allegations, FIR No. 263 dated 2.5.2015, under Sections 279 and 337 IPC was registered in Police Station, Sadar Karnal.

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 took place due to rash and negligent driving of vehicle (canter) No.HR-45B-0176 by respondent No.1 Vikram, resulting in the injuries to minor Rakshit?OPP

2. Whether the claimant is entitled compensation. If so, how much and from whom? OPP

3. Whether the offending vehicle was being driven in violation of terms and conditions of Insurance Policy. If so, its effect?OPR-3

4. Relief.

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

SUBMISSIONS OF THE LEARNED COUNSELS FOR THE PARTIES

6. Learned counsel for the appellant–Insurance Company contends that the learned Tribunal has committed error in fastening liability upon the Insurance Company to pay compensation. He further contends that the driver was not holding valid driving license at the time of accident. Therefore, the Insurance Company cannot be held liable to indemnify the insured or to satisfy the award. He, therefore prays that the present appeal be allowed.

7. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 2 argues on the lines of the award and prays that the present appeal be dismissed.

8. I have hea