Present: Mr. Yogesh Saini Advocate Vs. Banta Singh and Others - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/1134348
CourtPunjab and Haryana High Court
Decided OnMar-11-2014
AppellantPresent: Mr. Yogesh Saini Advocate
RespondentBanta Singh and Others
Excerpt:
in the high court of punjab and haryana at chandigarh fao no.992 of 1997 (o&m) date of decision: 11.03.2014 sohan singh alias tinku and others ..appellants versus banta singh and others ...respondents coram: hon’ble mr.justice k. kannan ---- present: mr.yogesh saini, advocate, for mr.pritam saini, advocate, for the appellants. mr.neeraj khanna, advocate, for the insurance company-respondent no.3. ---- k.kannan, j. (oral) 1. the appeal is against the dismissal of the petition for a claim made against the respondents on a plea that a tanker hra- 4007 was involved in the accident. an alleged eyewitness pw2 stated the involvement of this vehicle hra-4007 and vishal sharma who is the owner of the said tanker also came to the court as rw2 to say that his vehicle was involved in the accident. the contention in defence by the insurer was that the fir had been lodged by one pawan kumar son of sat pal soon after the accident on 23.01.1994 referring the vehicle registration no.hya-7247 as the vehicle which was involved in the accident and that it was driven by a person whose name he did not know. the court observed that if the fir kumar sanjeev 2014.03.19 10:40 fao no.992 of 1997 (o&m) -2- revealed the involvement of some other vehicle, it was not possible to believe a statement of second respondent who owned up the accident. the number hya-7247 bears neither ocular resemblance or phonetic similarity to number hra-4007. if the tribunal found the case to be brought under collusion and also observed that the involvement of hra-4007 cannot be found on a mere admission by the second respondent, it has done so on available material and by a reasoning which i approve of. 2. i find no reason to modify the award of dismissal. it is maintained and the appeal is dismissed. (k.kannan) judge1103.2014 sanjeev kumar sanjeev 2014.03.19 10:40
Judgment:

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.992 of 1997 (O&M) Date of decision: 11.03.2014 Sohan Singh alias Tinku and others ..Appellants versus Banta Singh and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE Mr.JUSTICE K.

KANNAN ---- Present: Mr.Yogesh Saini, Advocate, for Mr.Pritam Saini, Advocate, for the appellants.

Mr.Neeraj Khanna, Advocate, for the Insurance Company-respondent No.3.

---- K.Kannan, J.

(Oral) 1.

The appeal is against the dismissal of the petition for a claim made against the respondents on a plea that a tanker HRA- 4007 was involved in the accident.

An alleged eyewitness PW2 stated the involvement of this vehicle HRA-4007 and Vishal Sharma who is the owner of the said tanker also came to the Court as RW2 to say that his vehicle was involved in the accident.

The contention in defence by the insurer was that the FIR had been lodged by one Pawan Kumar son of Sat Pal soon after the accident on 23.01.1994 referring the vehicle registration No.HYA-7247 as the vehicle which was involved in the accident and that it was driven by a person whose name he did not know.

The Court observed that if the FIR Kumar Sanjeev 2014.03.19 10:40 FAO No.992 of 1997 (O&M) -2- revealed the involvement of some other vehicle, it was not possible to believe a statement of second respondent who owned up the accident.

The number HYA-7247 bears neither ocular resemblance or phonetic similarity to number HRA-4007.

If the Tribunal found the case to be brought under collusion and also observed that the involvement of HRA-4007 cannot be found on a mere admission by the second respondent, it has done so on available material and by a reasoning which I approve of.

2.

I find no reason to modify the award of dismissal.

It is maintained and the appeal is dismissed.

(K.KANNAN) JUDGE1103.2014 sanjeev Kumar Sanjeev 2014.03.19 10:40