Judgment:
FAO-876-2014 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO-876-2014 (O&M) (MACT case No.31 of 2012) Date of decision:
12. 2.2014 National Insurance Co. Ltd. ...Appellant Versus Malkiat Kaur and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN Present: Mr.Rajneesh Malhotra, Advocate for the appellant **** Jitendra Chauhan, J.
1. The present appeal has been filed by the Insurance Company assailing the award dated 2.11.2013, passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Hoshiarpur (for short 'the Tribunal'), vide which, a sum of Rs.20,02,000/- has been awarded to the claimants-respondent Nos. 1 to 4 and the Insurance Company alongwith the driver and owner has been held liable to pay the compensation.
2. Learned counsel for the appellant refers to the statement of Resham Singh CW2, who has categorically stated that there was no other vehicle on the road and three vehicles could easily pass on simultaneously. Learned counsel submits that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the deceased. It is a case of contributory negligence, as the accident was head on collusion.
3. I have heard the learned counsel for the appellant and Shanker Gauri 2014.02.18 17:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh FAO-876-2014 (O&M) 2 perused the case file.
4. However, CW2 Resham Singh has specifically stated that the driver of the offending car was driving the car in rash and negligent manner and came towards the wrong side, which caused the accident, as a result of which, Roshan Singh, driver of the motorcycle, died at the spot.
5. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and on appreciation of the evidence led by the parties, the Tribunal has taken one probable view. Learned counsel has failed to refer any circumstance, which can be said to be sufficient to demonstrate that the view taken is perverse. Otherwise also, this Court is not inclined to substitute with a view already taken with another possible view.
6. No other point is raised.
7. In view of the above, this Court finds no merits in the present appeal. Accordingly, the instant appeal is dismissed.
8. However, the statutory amount deposited by the appellant at the time of filing the appeal be sent to the learned Tribunal for disbursement to the claimants. 12.2.2014 (JITENDRA CHAUHAN) gsv JUDGE Shanker Gauri 2014.02.18 17:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh