IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 29.01.2025 Jasbir Singh ......Appellant Vs.

Surinder Singh and others ......Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA Present: Mr. K.S.Dhanora, Advocate, for the appellant.

Mr. R.S.Budhwar, Advocate, for respondent No.1.

Mr. Sanjiv Pabbi, Advocate, for respondent No.2-Insurance Company.

****

SUDEEPTI SHARMA J.

1. The present appeal has been preferred for setting aside the award dated 10.01.2006 passed in the claim petition filed under Sections 166, 140 and 141 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short, ‘MV Act’) by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kurukshetra (for short, 'the Tribunal'), whereby claim petition filed by the appellant/claimant, was dismissed.

FACTS NOT IN DISPUTE

2. The brief facts of the case are that on 16.04.2004 at about 11:30 A.M., the appellant/claimant had taken a lift as a pillion rider on Moped bearing registration No.HYQ-7183, being driven by one Gurnam Singh at a normal speed and on the correct side of the road. When they reached at Ladwa Chowk, Shahabad, suddenly a Three-Wheeler bearing registration No.HR-65-0889, being driven by respondent No.1 (Surinder Singh), came from behind at a high speed and in a rash and negligent manner, violating traffic rules, hit the said moped from behind. As a result thereof, Gurnam Singh could not control his Moped, which led to the appellant/claimant falling and sustaining multiple grievous injuries on various parts of his body. After the accident, respondent No.1 fled from the spot along with the three- wheeler. However, later on, he was challaned by the police of Police Station, Shahabad and in this regard, FIR No.156 dated 24.04.2004 under Sections 279, 337 and 338 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, was registered at Police Station Shahabad, District Kurukshetra.

3. Upon notice of the claim petition, the respondents appeared and filed their separate replies denying the factum of accident/compensation.

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

“1) Whether the accident in question resulting into injuries on the person of claimant Jasbir Singh was caused due to rash and negligent driving of three- wheeler bearing no.HR-65-0889 by its driver, respondent no.1, as alleged? OPP

2) If issue No.1 is proved, to what amount of compensation the petitioner is entitled to and from whom? OPP

3) Whether respondent no.1 was not holding a valid and effective driving licence on the date of alleged accident? OPR.

4) Relief.”

5. After taking into consideration the pleadings and the evidence on record, the learned Tribunal dismissed the claim petition. Hence, the present appeal.

SUBMISSIONS OF LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE PARTIES

6. Learned counsel for the appellant/claimant contends that the learned Tribunal dismissed the claim petition on the ground that there was a delay of 09 days in lodging the FIR and the appellant/claimant failed to prove that the accident was caused by rash and negligent driving of respondent No.1-Surinder Singh.

7. Per contra, learned counsel for respondents No.1 and 2, however, vehemently argue on the lines of the award dated 10.01.2006 and submit that the award has rightly been dismissed by the learned Tribunal.

Therefore, they pray for dismissal of the present appeal.

8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the whole record of this case.

9. The relevant portion of the award reads as under:-

“7. To begin with, it has been argued by the learned counsel for the claimant that on 16.4.2004 at about 4.30 P.M., he had gone to Shahabad for bringing materials for his shop. He was waiting for some vehicle for going to Shahabad. In the mean time, a Moped bearing no. HYQ- 7183, driven by Gurnam Singh, came there and claimant Jasbir Singh took the lift. The Moped was being driven at a moderate speed and on the due left side of the road. When they reached Ladwa-Babain Road, Shahabad, a three-wheeler bearing No. HR-65-0889 came in a rash an