##PAGE1##

FAO-1776-2008 Page 1 of 6

(cid:1)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

220

FAO-1776-2008(O&M)

Date of decision: 06.05.2026

Shiv Kumar

...Appellant(s)

Vs.

Nagina Khan & Others

...Respondent(s)

CORAM: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA

Present:- Mr. Arvind Singh, Advocate for

Mr. Ram Kumar Saini, Advocate

for the appellant.

***

NIDHI GUPTA, J.

Present appeal has been filed by the injured-claimant laying

challenge to the Award dated 09.01.2008 passed by the Motor Accident

Claims Tribunal, Yamuna Nagar at Jagadhri (hereinafter ‘the learned

Tribunal’) in MACT Case No.73 dated 07.10.2005 filed under Section 166 of

Motor Vehicles Act (hereinafter “the Act”) whereby Claim Petition had

been dismissed.

2. It was pleaded case of the appellant before the learned

Tribunal that the appellant had suffered injuries in a motor vehicular

accident that took place on 06.04.2005 at about 12 pm due to the rash and

negligent driving of Motorcycle bearing registration No.HR-02-M-3687

(hereinafter “the offending vehicle”) being driven by respondent No.1,

SUNENA

2026.05.08 10:18

I agree to specified

portions of this document

(cid:1)

FAO-1776-2008 Page 2 of 6

(cid:1)

owned by respondent No.2, and insured by respondent No.3. However, the

learned Tribunal upon appraisal of pleadings and oral & documentary

evidence adduced by the parties had concluded that the appellant had

failed to establish that the present accident had taken place due to the rash

and negligent driving of the offending vehicle by respondent No.1.

Accordingly, although compensation was assessed by the learned Tribunal

as Rs.1,20,000/-, however, in view of the findings on issue No.1, Claim

Petition came to be dismissed.

3. It is inter alia submitted by learned counsel for the appellant

that the findings returned by the learned Tribunal against the appellant

with regard to issue No.1 are contrary to the evidence on record. Further,

the learned Tribunal had failed to appreciate that due to the injury, the

appellant has become permanently disabled. The appellant has spent more

than Rs.1,50,000/- on his treatment and medicines. The appellant had

remained admitted in Gaba Hospital from 06.04.2005 to 06.05.2005 where

operation was conducted on the abdomen of the appellant and more than

12 bottles of blood were transfused. The appellant again remained

admitted in Gaba Hospital from 12.05.2005 to 17.05.2005 and again

surgery was conducted. The appellant had spent Rs.1,50,000/- on his

treatment. It is accordingly prayed that the impugned Award be set aside

and compensation be awarded to the appellant.

SUNENA

2026.05.08 10:18

I agree to specified

portions of this document

(cid:1)

FAO-1776-2008 Page 3 of 6

(cid:1)

4. No other argument is made on behalf of the appellant. I have

heard learned counsel and perused the case file in detail. I find no merit in

the submissions advanced on behalf of the appellant.

5. A perusal of record of the case shows that in respect of the

accident dated 06.04.2005, a Daily Diary Report No.26 dated 24.04.2005

was recorded at Police Post Buria Gate, Jagadhri (Ex.P58) on the basis of

statement made by the appellant. It is to be noted that as per the said first

version of the accident given by the appellant himself, the appellant had

stated that:

A) The respondent No.1/driver was driving the offending motorcycle at

controlled speed;

B) A child of about 8 years of age came in front of motorcycle of respondent

No.1/driver;

C) The respondent No.1/driver tried to save the child;

D) The child was saved but offending motorcycle had struck against

claimant’s motorcycle;

E) the appellant has categorically mentioned in Ex.P58 that respondent

No.1 was not at fault for this accident which has taken place by chance. The

appellant has further categorically stated that he does not want any legal

action against anybody.

6. To come out of the rigor of the above-said own statement, in

the Claim Petition the appellant has contended that at time of making

SUNENA

2026.05.08 10:18

I agree to specified

portions of this document

(cid:1)