IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH BAJAJ ALLIANZ GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.

...Appellant VS.

SANTOSH RANI AND OTHERS ...Respondents Reserved on: 06.02.2026 Pronounced on: 06.03.2026 Uploaded on: 12.03.2026 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 Mr. Sachin Gupta, Advocate for the applicant/appellant/Insurance Co.

Mr. Dheeraj Narula, Advocate for respondent Nos.1 to 5.

SUDEEPTI SHARMA , J. (Oral)

1. Since award dated 02.07.2025 is challenged in all the appeals, therefore, all the three appeals shall be decided vide this common judgment.

2. The present appeal is preferred against award dated 02.07.2025 passed by Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Sirsa, Haryana, whereby, claimants were awarded compensation on account of death of Mahender Singh, Nek Chand and on account of multiple serious, grievous injuries and permanent disability to Rohit Kumar and liability was fixed upon appellant-

Insurance Company.

3. Brief facts of the case are that on 02.02.2020 at about 8.00 AM, the husband of the petitioner No.1, Nek Chand, Simran, Mohit, Rohit and Sunil had left Village Bahabalpur Theri for Jalalabad (Punjab) for attending marriage in a Alto Car No.HR-22-M/3224 which was being driven by Mahender Singh (since deceased) at a moderate speed and correct left side of the road. Thereafter they went to petrol pump after crossing Toll Plaza Bdhavdeen for filling fuel in the car. At about 9.15AM, after filling fuel in car, when they were going toward Sirsa, then the road was closed and lot of vehicles were standing on the road and due to this reason all the vehicle were going and coming on the same road (Petrol Pump side) and when they were going towards Sirsa side meanwhile a Car Mahindra and Mahindra No.DL- 10-CT/1492 colour white came from Sirsa side, which was being driven by respondent No.1 at a high speed and in rash and negligent manner and struck his XUV car into the car of Mahender Singh. The impact was so great that all the person of Alto Car sustained serious, grievous and multiple injuries on their person and both cars were become damaged. The respondent No.1 has fled away from the place of occurrence after causing this accident while leaving his Car on the spot. Thereafter all the injured persons brought to GH Sirsa where Mahender Singh and Nek Chand were declared dead by the doctors due to the injuries sustained by them in this accident. Om Parkash son of Ram Chand, brother of Nek Chand was informed by his son Sunil about the accident through Mobile phone who reached at the spot as well as Hospital.

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

“1. Whether Mahender Sinfg son of Kashmir Chand, Nek Chand @ Harnek Chand son of Ram Chand died, Rohit Kumar sustained injuries and Car No.HR22M- 3224 damaged in a road accident which took place due to rash and negligent driving of car bearing No. DL10CT-1492 by respondent No.1 as alleged in the petition?OPP

2. If issue No.1 is proved, whether the petitioners are entitled to any compensation if so to what amount and from whom?OPP

3. Whether the respondent No.1 was not having any valid and effective driving licence at the time of alleged accident and contravened the terms and conditions of the insurance policy?OPR.

4. Relief”

5. After considering the evidence, oral as well as documentary, the claim petition filed by the claimants was allowed and appellant-Insurance Company was held liable to pay compensation. Hence, the present appeal.

6. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant–insurance company contends that the finding recorded by the learned Tribunal on Issue No. 1 with regard to negligence is unsustainable in law and on facts. He further contends that learned Tribunal failed to properly appreciate the material evidence available on record, particularly the site plan (Ex. P-7). He further contends