IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Reserved on :-08.09.2025 Pronounced on :-16.09.2025 National Insurance Company Limited … Appellant Versus Aarti and Others ... Respondents ****

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIRINDER AGGARWAL Argued by :-

Mr. Punit Jain, Advocate for the appellant.

Mr. S.S. Gill, Advocate for Mr. Yajat Gill, Advocate for respondents No.2 to 3 and 5.

Mr. Jitender Singh Kundu, Advocate for respondent NO.7.

****

VIRINDER AGGARWAL , J .

1. The present appeal has been filed by appellant-respondent No.3 challenging the award dated 30.01.2024 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kaithal, in a claim petition instituted by the respondent- claimant. By the impugned award, the Tribunal allowed the claim petition and directed payment of compensation amounting to `67,57,219/- along with interest at the rate of 6% per annum in favor of the claimant. The award was made on account of the death of Hemant Kumar, who tragically lost his life in a motor vehicle accident that occurred on 24.04.2018. The claim petition had been filed on the ground that the deceased was traveling in a motor vehicle which met with an accident due to the alleged negligent driving, and the compensation was assessed to cover the loss suffered by the legal heirs of the deceased, including his wife, children, and parents.

2. Briefly stated, the claimants, being the wife, children, and parents of the deceased Hemant Kumar, filed the present claim petition following a fatal motor vehicle accident that occurred on 24.04.2018. It is alleged that the deceased, accompanied by his friends, was traveling from Dehradun to Haridwar in a car bearing registration No. HR08-X-1968, driven by respondent No.1 in a rash and negligent manner. Upon reaching near Village Chhidarwala, the vehicle allegedly overturned while attempting to avoid a motorcyclist, causing grievous injuries to Hemant Kumar and his co- passengers, namely Jatinder, Sandeep, and Harsh. The deceased succumbed to his injuries in the accident. At the time of his death, Hemant Kumar was aged 35 years and was engaged in business as a shopkeeper, earning a monthly income of `60,000/-. The vehicle involved in the accident was owned by respondent No.2 and insured with the respondent Insurance Company through Maruti Insurance.

2.2 On these facts, the claimants sought compensation for the death of Hemant Kumar, claiming compensation along with interest, holding respondent No.1, the driver, responsible for rash and negligent driving, and respondent No.2 along with the Insurance Company liable for compensation under the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act.

3. Respondents No.1 and 2 vehemently opposed the claim petition, asserting that the same was neither maintainable nor founded on truthful allegations. They contended that respondent No.1 had exercised due care and caution while driving and was in no way responsible for the occurrence of the accident.

4. Appellant-respondent No.3 contested the claim petition on multiple grounds, asserting that it was not maintainable. It was contended that no accident occurred as alleged due to any rash or negligent driving on the part of respondent No.1. Reference was made to DDR No.24 dated 25.04.2018, which reportedly indicated that the vehicle overturned suddenly without any fault of the driver. It was further argued that no specific allegations of rash or negligent driving had been made, rendering the claim petition non-maintainable under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act. Additionally, it was submitted that the deceased may have sustained injuries elsewhere, the petition suffered from mis-joinder and non-joinder of necessary parties, and the offending vehicle was allegedly being driven in violation of the insurance policy terms and without a valid registration certificate. The appellant-respondent also contended that the claim petition appeared collusive between the claimants and the other respondents, and that the interest claimed was highly excessive.