Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Gurdhian Singh and ors. - Court Judgment

Excerpt:

- haryana urban(control of rent and eviction)act,1973[har.act no.11/1973] -- section 4(2)(b): [m.m. kumar, hemant gupta, ajay & kumar mittal, jj] determination of fair rent held, the fair rent of building under the section is to be determined on the basis of rent agreed between landlord and tenant preceding the date of application. in the absence of rent agreed between parties the basic rent is required to be determined on the basis of rent prevailing in locality for a similar building or rented land on the date of application. if on the date of filing of the application under section 4 of the act for determination of fair rent, the agreed rent was still in vogue thus, it has to be regarded as the basic rent and the same would be constituted as the basis for determining fair rent. thus, where rs.500/- was paid as rent by tenant to the landlord, the same would be regarded as agreed rate of rent and the agreed rate of rent has to be regarded as basic rent within the meaning of section 4(2)(b) of the act in the process of fixing fair rent irrespective of the fact whether the lease period stipulated in a lease deed has expired......for special diet.6. only contention raised by learned counsel for the insurance company is that the driving licence was fake. this plea has been duly considered by the tribunal and it was found that onkar nath sharma, clerk, who had given the report which was relied upon, was habitual of issuing false reports and on account of which, he was retired compulsorily. the report exh. r2 given by the onkar nath sharma, clerk was thus, disbelieved.7. the tribunal held that the driver had the driving licence exh. r1, photocopy of which was duly proved and the licence had been renewed till 25.9.2005 and was, thus, in operation on the date of accident. ownership of the vehicle was also duly proved, apart from insurance policy.8. after considering the submissions made on behalf of the appellant, we are in agreement with the finding recorded by the tribunal that there was no breach of insurance policy and that the accident has taken place on account of rash and negligent drivingand hold that the quantum of compensation fixed is not excessive.9. accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.

Judgment:

ORDER

1. This order will dispose of FAO Nos. 4785 and 4786 of 2006 as both the appeals arises out of the same award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal.

2. Gurmeet Kaur and others preferred a claim petition on account of death of Mewa Singh, who along with Gurdhian Singh was going from Pehowato Cheeka by a motor cycle on 2.3.2005 at 7.30 p.m. He was hit by a truck bearing No. HR-63-3909 which was being driven by Palwinder Singh. He was taken to the hospital, where he was declared brought dead.

3. Gurdhian Singh filed a claim petition on account of injuries sustained by him in the said accident. The petition was contested by the driver, owner as well as the Insurance Company.

4. Following issues were framed:

1. Whether the accident resulting into death of Mewa Singh and injuries to Gurdhian Singh took place on 2.3.2005 on account of rash and negligent driving of truck No. HR-63-3909 by respondent No. 1?--OPP

2. If issue No. 1 is proved, whether petitioners are entitled to compensation, if so, to what amount and from whom?--OPP

3. Whether drivers of the offending truck was not holding a valid and effective driving licence and the truck in question was being driven in contravention of terms and conditions of the insurance policy on the date of accident?--OPR

4. Relief.

5. The Tribunal after considering the evidence, held that the death of Mewa Singh took place on account of rash and negligent driving of the truck by the driver of the truck. Similarly, injuries were suffered by Gurdhian Singh on account of rash and negligent driving of the said truck. Reference was, inter alia, made to the evidence of P.W. 1 Rai Singh, the author of the FIR, Exh. P1; P.W. 2 Gurdhian Singh, injured-claimant, who was on the motor cycle being driven by the deceased Mewa Singh; Exh. P2, the site plan on record; P.W. 3 Gurmeet Kaur widow of the deceased Mewa Singh, who proved the income of the deceased and relationship to the claimants; and Exh. P3, the post-mortem report. The Tribunal held that the deceased was an agriculturist and was running a dairy and was earning Rs. 3,000 per month. After deducting 1/3rd of the earnings for his own expenses, dependency was 35 years of age and by applying the multiplier of 16, compensation for death was worked out at Rs. 4,04,000, after adding transportation charges and loss of consortium. Injured was held entitled to Rs. 82,600 out of which, sum of Rs. 76,400 was towards medical expenses, 5,000 towards pain and sufferings and Rs. 1,200 for special diet.

6. Only contention raised by learned Counsel for the Insurance Company is that the driving licence was fake. This plea has been duly considered by the Tribunal and it was found that Onkar Nath Sharma, Clerk, who had given the report which was relied upon, was habitual of issuing false reports and on account of which, he was retired compulsorily. The report Exh. R2 given by the Onkar Nath Sharma, Clerk was thus, disbelieved.

7. The Tribunal held that the driver had the driving licence Exh. R1, photocopy of which was duly proved and the licence had been renewed till 25.9.2005 and was, thus, in operation on the date of accident. Ownership of the vehicle was also duly proved, apart from insurance policy.

8. After considering the submissions made on behalf of the appellant, we are in agreement with the finding recorded by the Tribunal that there was no breach of insurance policy and that the accident has taken place on account of rash and negligent drivingand hold that the quantum of compensation fixed is not excessive.

9. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.