IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. ......Appellant vs.

ANVARI AND ORS. ......Respondents Reserved on : 21.04.2026 Pronounced on: 27.04.2026 Uploaded on: 04.05.2026 Whether only the operative part of the judgment is pronounced? NO Whether full judgment is pronounced? YES CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA Present: Mr. Sahej Mahajan, Advocate for the appellants.

Mr. R.S. Mamli, Advocate for respondent Nos.1 to 5.

Respondent Nos.6 to 9 were proceeded against ex parte vide order dated 18.04.2017.

****

SUDEEPTI SHARMA J .

1. The present appeal has been filed by the appellant-Insurance company against the award dated 11.08.2015 passed in a claim petition filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kurukshetra (for short, 'the Tribunal'), wherein the appellant- Insurance company was fastened with the liability to pay the compensation of Rs.28,75,080/- to the claimants along with interest @ 9 % per annum from the date of filing of claim petition till recovery.

BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE

2. The brief facts of the case are that on dated 2.4.2015, above named Rahamdeen (since deceased) was travelling as pillion rider on a motorcycle bearing registration no.HR-07L-1332 being driven by his brother Rafiqdeen and they were going from their village Jharauli Kalan to village Mustfabad, District Yamuna Nagar and at about 8.00 P.M. they reached just one kilometer short of village Kalsani in front of Dera of one Inderjit Singh, Numberdar, where the respondent no.1 had parked his tractor bearing registration no.HR- 78-8910 in the middle of the road without giving any indicator etc. and due to that reason the motor-cycle being driven by said Rafiqdeen struck against the stationary tractor in its back side and as a result of which, both the occupants of the motor-cycle fell down on the road alongwith the motor-cycle and Rahamdeen suffered serious and grievous injuries on his person. It is further asserted that the respondent no.1 then alighted from the tractor and came near Rahamdeen and Rafiqdeen for a while but lateron he fled away from the spot by taking advantage of crowd. It is further asserted that the injured Rahamdeen was taken to CHC, Shahabad, where he was declared dead by the doctors and consequently FIR No.144 dated 3.4.2015, under sections 283, 304-A IPC was registered at Police Station, Shahabad against respondent no.1. According to the claimants-petitioners, the said Rahamdeen, at time of his death, was aged about 35 years and was working as driver and also doing dairy farming and was thus earning ₹30,000/- per month. It is further asserted that the postmortem on the dead body of said Rahamdeen was conducted at LNJP Hospital, Kurukshetra and a sum of ₹70,000/- was spent on treatment, medicines, attendant charges, transportation and last rites of deceased. It is further asserted that due to the untimely death of said Rahamdeen, the claimants petitioners have lost their only bread earner and whole of the family has crippled. In this way, the claimants-petitioners have claimed the above mentioned amount as of compensation from the respondents.

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

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

“1. Whether accident dated 2.4.2015, resulting into death of Rahamdeen took place due to rash and negligent act of the respondent no.1 while he parked the tractor bearing registration no.HR-78-8910 in the middle of the road without giving any indicator etc. if so, to what effect? OPP

2. If issue no.1 is proved, then to what amount of compensation and from whom the claimants-petitioners are entitled to? OPP

3. Whether the respondent no.1 was not having any valid and effective driving licence at the material time and there was violation of the terms and