IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO-7406-2018 (O&M)

Date of decision: 09.02.2026 Smt. Mona Devi & Others ...Appellant(s)

Vs.

Surjeet & Others ...Respondent(s)

CORAM: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Present:- Mr. Dheeraj Narula, Advocate for the appellants.

Mr. Kuljit Singh, Advocate for respondents No.1 and 2.

Mr. G.S. Sarao, Advocate Mr. Vishal Aggarwal, Advocate for respondent No.3.

***

NIDHI GUPTA, J.

The present appeal has been filed by the claimants against the dismissal of their claim petition by the learned MACT, Sirsa (hereinafter ‘the Tribunal’), vide Award dated 13.07.2018 passed in MACP Case No.37 dated 27.02.2017 filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). The 6 claimants are the widow, three minor children, and parents of deceased Ranjit Singh.

2. The pleaded case of the claimants before the learned Tribunal as recorded in paras 2 and 3 of the impugned Award is that: -

“2. Brief facts of the case are that on 11.11.2016 at about 8-20 P.M. Ranjit Singh son of Bagrawat (since deceased) was going to village Bhuratwala, District Sirsa from M/s Sihag Motors and Parts Agency, Sirsa Road Ellenabad to village Bhuratwala on his motorcycle bearing registration No.HR-44H-2424. Dana Ram son of Mani Ram and Anand son of Ishwar Singh were also following him on their motorcycle No.HR-44D-3837. When the deceased reached near Brick Kiln of village Poharka, a tractor bearing registration No.HR-24W-1907 was going ahead of the motorcycle of Ranjit Singh. The said tractor was being driven by the respondent no.1 in rash and negligent manner and suddenly applied brakes on account of which the motorcycle of Ranjit Singh struck into the trolley of the said tractor as a result of which Ranjit Singh had fallen on the road and received grievous injuries on his person. The respondent no.1 fled away from the spot after causing the accident. Ranjit Singh was taken to General Hospital, Sirsa where he was declared dead and postmortem was got conducted on 12.11.2016. Matter was reported to the police and an FIR no.306 dated 12.11.2016 was registered at P.S.Ellenabad against the respondent no.1 on the statement of Dana Ram s/o Mani Ram.

3. The petitioners further submitted that the deceased was aged about 36 years at the time of death in the accident. He was hale and hearty and was not suffering from any disease or infirmities. He was a trained mechanic and was employed at M/s Sihag Motor and Parts, Sirsa Road Ellenabad and was earning ₹ 25,000/- per month. The petitioners were residing with the deceased and they were fully dependent upon the income of the deceased. The petitioners were under great shock due to untimely death of Ranjit Singh and have lost love and affection.

The petitioners submitted that the accident was caused by the respondent no.1 by driving the offending vehicle in rash and negligent manner and the respondents no.1 to3, being driver, owner and insured of the offending vehicle are liable to pay the compensation jointly and severally.”

3. The learned Tribunal upon appraisal of pleadings and oral & documentary evidence adduced by the parties had concluded that the appellants “have failed to prove that the accident in question was caused by respondent no.1 while driving the tractor in question belonging to respondent no.2, as alleged in the petition.”. Accordingly, the Claim Petition of the appellants came to be dismissed.

4. It is inter alia submitted by learned counsel for the appellants that the learned Tribunal was in patent error in dismissing the Claim Petition of the appellants by holding that the appellants had failed to prove that the offending vehicle was being driven rashly and negligently by respondent No.1. It was further observed by the learned Tribunal that FIR No.306 dated 12.11.2016 under Sections 279, 304-A, 427 IPC at Police Station Ellenabad had been registered against an unknown person and an unknown vehicle. Learned counsel contends that the observati