IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

219 FAO-2263-2007 Date of Decision: January 29, 2025 Jaswant and another ......appellant(s)

Vs.

Raj Kumar and another ......Respondent(s)

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA Present: Mr. J.P. Sharma, Advocate for the appellant Mr. Neeraj Khanna, Advocate for Mr. R.N. Singal, Advocate for for the respondent-Insurance Company ----

S UDEEPTI SHARMA J. (ORAL)

1. The instant appeal has been preferred by the owner and driver of the offending vehicle for setting aside the award dated 05.10.2006 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Narnaul (for short, 'the Tribunal'), whereby the claimants were awarded compensation of Rs.1,40,000/- along with interest @ 7 % per annum.

FACTS NOT IN DISPUTE

2. The brief facts of the case as mentioned in the claim petition are that on 17.4.2005, the appellant was travelling in truck bearing registration No.RJ-18G/2376 as conductor and the said truck left Delhi for Narnaul, which was being driven by respondent No.1-Jaswant in a rash and negligent manner at a high speed. It is alleged that the appellant requested respondent No.1 to drive the truck at a slow speed but he did not pay any heed and continued to drive the truck in the same fashion. It is alleged that at about 4.30 a.m., when the truck reached near Nadha turning of village Majra, in the meantime, a TATA four- wheeler came from the opposite side and the truck hit against the four-wheeler. As a result of which, the truck turned turtle and the appellant received injuries. He was taken to Civil Hospital Rewari where he was medico-legally examined and after giving first aid, he was taken to Pooja Hospital Narnaul. It is alleged that the accident had taken place due to rash and negligent driving of truck No.RJ-18G/2376 by respondent No.1. FIR No.57 dated 17.4.2005 was registered at Police Station Khol, under sections 279, 337, 429 IPC by one-

Satish.

3. Upon notice of the claim petition, respondents appeared, filing written statement denying the factum of accident/compensation.

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

1. Whether the petitioner received injuries in a motor vehicular accident which took place on 17.4.2005 in the area of village Majra due to rash or negligent driving of truck No.RJ-18G/2376 by respondent No.1 owned by respondent No.2 and insured with respondent No.3, as alleged? OPP

2. To what amount of compensation the petitioner is entitled to and from whom? OPP

3. Whether the petition is not maintainable? OPR

4. Whether respondent No.1 was not holding a valid and effective driving licence on the date of alleged accident?

OPR

5. Relief

6. It pertinent to mention here that during the course of arguments, it came to the notice of the Tribunal that issue No.1 was not properly framed and the same has been re-

casted as under:-

1. Whether the petitioner received injuries in an accident that arose out of use of motor vehicle No.RJ-18G/2376 on 17.4.2005 in the area of village Majra, driven by respondent No.1, owned by respondent No.2 and insured with respondent No.3? OPP

5. After taking into consideration the pleadings and the evidence on record, the learned Tribunal awarded compensation to the tune of Rs.1,40,000/-, along with interest @ 7% per annum and Jaswant-driver (respondent No.1), Sanju Kumar-owner (respondent No.2) were jointly and severally held liable to pay the said amount. Since the vehicle was insured with respondent No.3-Oriental Insurance company Ltd., initially respondent No.3/Insurance Company was directed to make payment of compensation with the liberty to recover the amount of compensation payable to the claimants from the respondents No.1 and 2. Hence, the driver and owner-respondents No.1 and 2 filed the present appeal.

SUBMISSIONS OF THE COUNSELS FOR THE PARTIES

6. The learned counsel for the appellants contends that recovery rights have been wrongly granted by the Ld. Tribunal to the Insurance Company. He further contends th