Full Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.2378 of 1995 Date of Decision: 22.01.2014 Balwinder Singh alias Balinder Kumar ....Appellant Versus Narinder Kumar and others ....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE S.S.SARON Present: Mr.P.S.Rana, Advocate for the appellant.
None for the respondents.
S.S.SARON, J.
Learned counsel for the appellant has furnished his paper book.
The same has been photocopied and the record reconstructed as the record has been burnt by fire.
This appeal has been filed by Balwinder Singh alias Balinder Kumar claimant against the judgment and award dated 24.07.1995 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kurukshetra seeking enhancement of compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal ('Tribunal'-for short).The claim petition of Balwinder Singh alias Balinder Kumar-appellant was disposed of vide award dated 24.07.1995 passed in MACT case No.74 of 1993 titled 'Bharat Singh versus Narender Kumar etc.'.
Bharat Singh and Balwinder Singh alias Balinder Kumar-appellant were traveling on motorcycle with registration No.HNE-4847 towards Radaur.
The motorcycle reached near the fields of Khila Ram Jat in the area of village Ban.
At that time a Maruti car with registration No.DAQ- 1849 came from the side of Radaur i.e.opposite side which was driven by Narinder Kumar (respondent No.1).according to the Amit Kaundal appellant in a rash, negligent, careless and zig-zag manner; 2014.01.28 12:45 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh FAO No.2378 of 1995 -2- besides, at a fast speed.
The car came on the wrong side of the road and dashed against the motorcycle.
Due to which both the motorcyclists received several injuries.
Therefore, the claim petition was filed for seeking compensation.
The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal awarded Rs.30,000/- as compensation to Balwinder Singh appellant with interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum from the date of filing the petition which was filed on 16.04.1993 till the realisation of the amount from respondents No.1 to 3 whose liabilities were fixed as joint and several; besides, counsel's fee of Rs.330/- was assessed.
Today when the appeal came up for hearing, learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the Maruti car involved in the accident was not insured and the appellant has compromised with the respondents and received compensation.
Therefore, he does not press the present appeal and he may be permitted to withdraw the same.
Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn.
(S.S.SARON) JUDGE2201.2014 A.Kaundal Amit Kaundal 2014.01.28 12:45 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh