IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 03.07.2025 The Oriental Insurance Company Limited …Appellant Versus Seema and others …Respondents AND FAO No. 2943 of 2025 (O&M)

The Oriental Insurance Company Limited …..Appellant Versus Anju Rani and others ……Respondents CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKRAM AGGARWAL Present: Mr. D.P. Gupta, Advocate for the appellant(s) (in both appeals).

****

VIKRAM AGGARWAL, J (ORAL)

Both afore-titled appeals assail the award dated 03.01.2025 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Karnal (hereinafter referred to as ‘the MACT’), vide which claim petitions preferred under Sections 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘MV Act’)

were allowed.

2. In a motor vehicular accident which took place on 22.12.2021, two young persons namely Rustam @ Rustam Khan and Yash Kanojia unfortunately expired. Two claim petitions were instituted, one by the widow, minor son, minor daughter and parents of Rustam @ Rustam Khan for the grant of compensation of ` 80,00,000/- and the second claim petition was preferred by the parents of Yash Kanojia who claimed compensation of Rs. 1 Crore.

3. On 22.12.2021, one ASI Lachman Singh received telephonic information that two young boys were lying dead, having suffered accidental injuries at T-Point, Green Belt, Sector-4, Karnal. He, along with HC Rohtash reached the spot where he found two dead bodies of young boys and a damaged motorcycle lying at the spot. Information was sent to the Police Station City, Karnal.

4. On 23.12.2021, Sultan Singh gave a statement that on 22.12.2021, he, his son Rustam and friend Yash had gone to Karnal for some work. After completion of the work, they started back from Karnal. Rustam and Yash were on a motorcycle bearing registration no. HR-91-7382 make TVS Apache, whereas Sultan Singh was on a separate motorcycle bearing registration No. HR-05-AC-9267, make Bajaj Platina. When they reached near Pankaj Filling Station via service lane, a Canter bearing registration No.HR-45-C-4567 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘offending vehicle’) which was being driver by its driver at a very high speed and in a rash and negligent manner, came from the opposite side i.e., the wrong side of the road and struck against the motorcycle which was being driven by Rustam. Both Rustam and Yash fell on the road and the offending vehicle dragged the motorcycle for a long distance. He noted the registration number of the offending vehicle. Rustam and Yash succumbed to the injuries at the spot.

5. After the registration of the FIR, investigation was carried out and thereafter final report under Section 173 Cr.P.C., was submitted against the driver of the offending vehicle.

6. The claim petition was opposed. In the written statement filed by the driver and owner of the offending vehicle (respondents No.1 and 2 in the claim petition) (respondents No.6 and 7 in the present appeal), the factum of the accident was denied. The insurance company also filed its written statement raising its usual defences, while denying the factum of the accident.

7. From the pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed:-

“1. Whether accident in question took place on 22.12.2021 in the area of P.S City Karnal due to rash and negligent driving of offending canter bearing registration No. HR-45C- 4567 on the part of respondent No.1 resulting into death of Rustam and Yash Kanojia?OPP

2. If issue No. 1is proved, whether the claimants are entitled to any compensation, and if so how much and from whom? OPP

3. Whether the claim petitions are not legally maintainable in the present form?OPR

4. Whether the claimants have got no locus standi and cause of action to file the claim petition ?OPR

5. Whether the claim petitions are bad for mis-joinder and non-joinder of necessary parties? OPR

6. Whether the respondent No.1 was driving the offending vehicle in violation of the terms and conditions of the insurance policy and is not having a valid driving