Judgment:
FAO-2501-2715-2012 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH (I) FAO-2501-2012 (O&M) Date of decision:
10. 02.2014 Mohammad Anwar ...Appellant Versus Jasvir Singh and another ...Respondents (II) FAO-2715-2012 (O&M) Intsab Alam ...Appellant Versus Mohammad Anwar and another ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN Present: Mr. Anil Kumar Garg, Advocate, for appellant claimant-Mohammad Anwar. Mr. R.S. Ghumman, Advocate, for appellant owner-Intsab Alam. Mr. JJS Uppal, Advocate, for respondent driver-Jasvir Singh. JITENDRA CHAUHAN, J.
Two cross appeals, as noticed above, are being disposed Sethi Atul 2014.02.19 09:43 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh FAO-2501-2715-2012 -2- of by this single judgment, having arisen out of the same impugned Award dated 04.02.2012, passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sangrur (for short, 'the Tribunal').
2. Learned counsel for the appellant-claimant, contends that the learned Tribunal erred in no considering the bills Ex.C-30 to C-107 and Ex.C-188 to C-294, purchased from Datta Brothers.
3. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the appellant- owner contends that once the bills produced by the claimant have been disbelieved, the claim petition filed by the claimant ought to have been dismissed.
4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
5. It has come in the evidence that the bills Ex.C30 To Ex.C107 and Ex.C188 to Ex.C294, could not be proved on record as no corresponding sales have been shown by Dutta Brother, from where the medicines etc. were allegedly purchased. Similarly, the treating doctor, Dr. Puljot Bajaj, has also not been examined. Therefore, the veracity of the bills as above, is not proved on record and the learned Tribunal has rightly rejected the same. Consequently, FAO No.2501 of 2012, is dismissed.
6. As far as the appeal preferred by the owner is concerned, it is not in dispute that some of the bills produced by Sethi Atul 2014.02.19 09:43 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh FAO-2501-2715-2012 -3- the claimant before the learned Tribunal have been disbelieved, however, this fact alone is not sufficient to discard the very factum of the accident having taken place in the manner as indicated in the award. The compensation assessed by the learned Tribunal is just and appropriate and based upon appreciation of evidence. Therefore, the FAO No.2715 of 2012, is without any merit and the same is also dismissed. The order passed by the learned Tribunal be complied with within a period of one month from the date of receipt of certified copy of this judgment.
7. The statutory amount of Rs.25,000/-, deposited by the appellant-owner, be placed at the disposal of the Tribunal for reimbursement. 10.02.2014 ( JITENDRA CHAUHAN) atulsethi JUDGE Note : Whether to be referred to Reporter : Yes / No.Sethi Atul 2014.02.19 09:43 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh