Ved Parkash Munjal v. Bachan Singh and Ors

IN

Ved Parkash Mu

Bachan Singh an

CORAM : HON

Present: Mr for

Mr

for

Mr for

SUDEEPTI SH

1.

The

15.05.2007, wh Vehicles Act, 19 Kaithal. FACTS NOT IN

2.

Bri claimant-Ved P resident of Kait bearing no.HR-speed. When th

THE HIGH COURT OF PUN AT CHANDIGA -.-

FA Da unjal

Versus nd others

N'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUDE r.A.P. Bhandari, Advocate the appellant. r. Arvind Bansal, Advocate respondents No.1 and 2. r. Suvir Dewan, Advocate respondents No.3. -.- HARMA, J. (Oral)

e appellant in the present appe hereby, the claim petition filed 988 was dismissed by the learne N DISPUTE ief facts of the case are that o Parkash Munjal alongwith Chan thal started their journey from -06H-0099, which was being d hey reached at first turn from S

NJAB AND HARYANA ARH AO-4116-2007(O&M) ate of Decision :06.09.2024

....Appellant

....Respondents EEPTI SHARMA al has challenged the award da by the appellant under the Mo ed Motor Accident Claims Tribun on 03.01.2006 at about 3.15 p. nder Parkash son of Ram Kish village Siwan to Kaithal in a driven by claimant on a moder Siwan bye-pass chowk/Arjan Na

ated otor nal, .m., han car rate

bye pass chowk driven by its dri directly hit the claimant fell int It has been alle driving of the witnessed by Ind accident, said In Kaithal. It has injuries on vari aforestated accid

3.

Up the factum of ac

4.

Fro issues:-

k toward Khurana Road, then a ver in a rash and negligent mann car of the claimant from front o the drain and the claimant and eged that the said accident took bus No.HR-64-0054 by its d derjit son of Dr. Atam Singh Ma nderjit shifted the claimant and been alleged that the claiman ous parts of his body and his c dent. on notice of the claim petition, ccident. om the pleading of the parties, "1. Whether the accident claimant and damage to his

3.1.2006 at about 3.30 p.m Kaithal due to rash and ne 0054 by respondent no. 1 ? O

¶2Whether the claimant so, to what amount and from

bus bearing no. HR-64-0054 be ner came from the opposite side side, due to which, the car of d Chander Parkash received injur k place due to rash and neglig driver and the said accident w adan resident of Siwan and after Chander Parkash to Shah Hospi nt received multiple and griev car was also badly damaged in , respondents appeared and den the Tribunal framed the follow t resulting into the injuries to car no.HR-06H-0099 took place m. near Siwan bye-pass Cho egligent driving of bus no.HR-OPP. is entitled to compensation an m whom? OPP.

eing ries. gent was ital, vous nied wing e on owk

5.

Aft record, the lear appellant filed th SUBMISSIONS

6.

The appellant suffere Tribunal has wr part.

7.

Per contends that th

8.

I h record of this ca "In resp 64/ Ex own he Siw

¶3Whether the responde and effective driving licence OPR-3.

¶4Relief." ter hearing learned counsel for rned Tribunal dismissed the cl he present appeal for grant of co S OF THE COUNSELS For T e learned counsel for the clai ed injuries and was admitted in rongly dismissed the claim petiti r contra, learned counsel for th e learned Tribunal has rightly di have heard learned counsel for ase. Relevant portion of the judgm n order to prove rash and n pondent no.1, who was allegedl /0054 owned by respondent no.2 e claimant when appeared himse PA, wherein he has solemnly a ner of Car no. HR-06H/0099 an alongwith Chander Parkash s wan to Kaithal in the said car an

ent no.1 was not holding any va e at the time of alleged accide the parties and perusing the wh laim petition. Hence, the claim ompensation. HE PARTIES imant-appellant contends that the hospital for 5 days and learn ion on account of negligence on he respondent-Insurance Compa ismissed the claim petition. the parties and perused the wh ment is reproduced hereunder:- negligent driving on the part ly driving the bus bearing no. H 2 and insured by respondent no lf as PWI has tendered his affida affirmed and declared that he w nd on 3.1.2006, at about 3.15.p. started their journey from villa nd he was driving the said car a

alid ent? hole mant ned his any hole t of HR-o.3, avit was .m., age

mo Nag driv neg wro car mu acc acc Par Ort bus no. am trea no. he resp des app rec one

derate speed on his correct side gar Khurana Road bye-pass, th ven by respondent no.1 at a ve gligent manner came and struck ong side, due to which, the said r was badly damaged and he as ltiple injuries. He has categoric cident took place on account of e part of the driver of bus no. cident was witnessed by Inde rkash to Shah Hospital Kaitha thopedic Surgeon. He has furthe s belonged to Om Parbha Jain 2 and he remained under imp icably settled by the said schoo atment and thereafter, he got l 1 driver of offending bus no. HR also lodged the claim on ac pondent no.3 and respondent n spite the fact that the claimant proximately on the repair of the ceived under protest.

However, in his cross e more passenger was sitting in

e and when he reached near Arj hen a bus bearing no. HR-64/00 ery high speed and in a rash a against his car after coming on car fell in the Nala-drain and s well as Chander Parkash recei cally deposed that the afore sta f sole rash and negligent driving HR-64/0054 and the afore sta erjit who took him and Chan l, from where, he was referred er deposed that since the offend n Senior Model School respond pression that the matter would l and moreover he remained un lodged the FIR against respond R64/0054. He has also deposed t ccount of damage to his car no.3 gave a sum of Rs. 1,05,87 has spent a sum of Rs. Two l e said car and the said cheque w -examination, he has admitted t the said car with him. He has a

rjun said ived ated g on ated nder d to ding dent d be nder dent that r to 78/-, lacs was that

adm his

¶7has affi car cla nea bea neg wh wer Ved dis hav occ P11

¶8Cha whe He abo

mitted that he moved an applica statement was recorded by the p The claimant has also produ s tendered his affidavit Ex. P firmed and declared that on 3.1.2 r bearing registration no. HR-0 imant, who was driving the said ar Siwan bye-pass Chowk at K aring no.HR-64/0054 driven by gligent manner came from Khura ich, they received injuries and re taken to Shah Hospital Kait d the said car was badly damage

However, in his cross d Parkash claimant was known tantly related to him. He has a ve recorded his statement aft currence. The claimant has also

¶1However, on the other han and Goyal as RWI. who has erein he has solemnly affirmed was standing at bus stand Siw out 3 p.m., he got lift in the car n

ation to the police on 8.2.2006 a police on 27/28.2.2006. ced Chander Parkash as PW3, w PW3/A wherein he has solem 2006 he was coming to Kaithal i 06H/0099 alongwith Ved Park d car and when the said car reach Khurana Road, Kaithal, then a y respondent no.1 in a rash a ana side and hit the said car, due the car fell in the Nala and t thal by Inderjit son of Atam Sin ed. -examination, he has admitted t to him since long and he was a also admitted that the police mi fter one and half months of produced attested copy of FIR nd, the respondent produced Bh tendered his affidavit Ex. RWI d and declared that on 03.01.20 wan for coming to Kaithal and no. HR-06-H/0099 which was be

who mnly in a kash hed bus e to they ngh that also ight Ex. him WI/A.

¶006d at

driv said nea afte roa aga wh driv sta his sta

¶9who FIR tha sub said

ven by Ved Parkash and his cou e said car and both were known d car being driven at a very h ar Siwan Road bye pass, then a er seeing their car, the driver o ad, but even then Ved Parkash c ainst the said bus and the said c ich, he, said Ved Parkash and C d they were taken to Shah Hosp e accident took place on accoun e part of Ved Parkash and there ver of the bus and his statemen tion.

However, in his cross statement was recorded by th tion, city Kaithal. The respondent have also p o was appointed as investigatin R no. 135 dated 7.3.2006 police at after completion of necessa bmitted the report to the SHO c d report as Ex.R2.

usin Chander Parkash was sitting n to him. He has deposed that high speed and when they reach a bus came from Kaithal side a of the said bus on one side of could not control his car and str car fell in the ditches, as a resul Chander Parkash received injur pital Kaithal. He has deposed t nt of rash and negligent driving e was no negligence on the par nt was also recorded in the pol -examination, he has admitted t he police on 21.11.2006 in po produced Balbir Singh ASI as RW ng officer of this case pertaining station city, Kaithal. He has sta ary investigation of this case, concerned and he has testified

g in hed ruck lt of ries that g on rt of lice that lice W2, g to ated

dur as w

¶10as sole bus Roa opp hig stru gui pla rec resp sug

¶11of t in Bhi

However, in his cross ring investigation, he recorded t well as Bhim Chand Goyal who

To substantiate further, the RW3. who has tendered his aff emnly affirmed and declared th s no. HR-64-0054 and on that ad bye pass, then a car bearing posite side driven in a rash an gh speed and after seeing the sai en the driver of the said car co uck the same against his bus and ilt at the spot. He has categorica ace on account of rash and neglig e said car but on account of bein e case against the claimant. He h ceived the compensation on acc pondent no.3 insurance company

However, in his cros ggestion that the FIR has been go

Therefore, after going throug the case, it emerges that when o his car no. HR-06H/0099, in w im Chand Goyal RWI were sit

-examination, he has admitted t the statements of Chander Park were sitting in the said car. respondent no.1 himself appea ffidavit Ex. RW3/A wherein he hat on 3.1.2006, he was driver day, when he reached near Siw g no. HR06-H/0099 came from d negligent manner and at a v id car, he stopped his bus, but e ould not control over his car a d the driver of the car admitted ally deposed that the accident t gent driving on the part of drive ng co-village, he had not registe has also deposed that the school count of damage to the bus fr y as he was not negligent. ss-examination, he had denied ot cancelled under the influence. gh the evidence and circumstan on 3.1.2006 the claimant was go which Chander Parkash PW3 a tting and when they reached n

that kash ared has r on wan very even his ook r of ered has rom

nces oing

Khu wit resp

¶12sta on is t neg driv neg stop who aga ditc Ex. was inv wh age Ex.

urana road bye pass. Then the th bus no. HR-64/0054 driven pondent no.2 and insured by resp

As per the case of the claim e bus no.HR-64/0054 in a rash a ted accident took place on acco the part of respondent no.1, whe that the afore stated accident t gligent driving on the part of ving his car no. HR-06H/0099 a gligent manner and the driver pped the bus on the side of the o was driving his car could no ainst the bus and thereafter the s ches.

It has come in eviden e matter to the police on 7.3.2006 P11 bearing no. 135 dated 7.3 s got recorded regarding taking

It has also come in e vestigated regarding taking place ich, the present claim petition ha ency submitted the discharge r R2.

e afore stated accident took pl n by respondent no.1, owned spondent no.3. mant, respondent no. I was driv and negligent manner and the af ount or rash and negligent driv ereas the case of the opposite pa took place on account of rash a f the claimant himself, as he w at very high speed and in a rash a r of the bus after seeing the e road, but even then, the claim ot control over his car and str said car turned turtle and fell in nce that the claimant has record 6 on the basis of which, formal F

3.2006 under sections 279, 337 I place of the accident on 3.1.200 evidence that when the matter w e of accident on 3.1.2006 regard as been filed, then the investigat report under section 173 Cr. P

lace by ving fore ving arty was car mant ruck ded FIR IPC

¶06was ding ting

¶13is e in t con age Ex. tha neg HR

¶14who vid sta 06H bee acc dam him liab

Therefore, from the evidence evident that since the investigati the allegations leveled by the cl ntained in FIR no. 135 dated 7. ency has submitted the discharge R2 against respondent no. 1.

Therefore, when the i e discharge report against respo at the afore stated accident too gligent driving on the part of res R-64/0054 at the time of afore sta

Moreover, admittedly and e o was also sitting in the said ca de his affidavit Ex. RWI/A has ca ted accident took place on accou e part of Ved Parkash claimant H/0099 at the time of afore stated

Moreover, there is no en lodged approximately two cident as well as after the rece mage suffered by the care dr mself.

Therefore, in my opini ble for causing the afore stated

e and circumstances of the case ing agency had not found any tr laimant against respondent no.1 .3.2006 and thus, the investigat e report under section 173 Cr. P investigating agency has submit ondent no.1, then it cannot be h ok place on account of rash a spondent no.1 i.e. driver of bus ated accident. evidently, one Bhim Chand Goy ar at the time of accident has a ategorically deposed that the af unt of rash and negligent driving t, who was driving the car no.H d accident. explanation as to who the FIR months after taking place of ipt of compensation on accoun riven and owned by the claim ion, respondent no.1 cannot be h d accident resulting into damage

e, it ruth 1 as ting P.C. tted held no. yal, also fore g on HR-has t of mant held

aga

9.

A p sum of Rs.1,05, on account of d show that the ac the car. Even discharge report was submitted. sitting in the s categorically de driving on the p 06H-0099.

10.

In v

15.05.2007 and merit.

11.

Bef to Mr. Suvir De matter.

12.

All

September 06, 2 A.Kaundal

Whether s

Whether r

e car and injuries to the claima ainst the claimant and in favour perusal of the award shows that t ,878/- from respondent No.3 (Ne damage to his car. Further perus ccident took place due to rash an n in FIR lodged against the dr t under Section 173 Cr.P.C. Ex.R Even the statement of one B said car at the time of accide eposed that the accident took plac part of Ved Parkash – claimant view of the above, I do not fin the same is upheld. The present fore parting with the judgment, ewan, Advocate, for his able ass l the pending application(s), if an 2024

(SU

speaking/non-speaking : Speakin reportable

: Yes/No

ant and such, this issue is decid of the respondents." the claimant had already receive ew India Assurance company L sal of the evidence of the witnes nd negligent driving of the driver driver of the bus No.HR-64-00 R-2 against respondent No.1-dri Bhim Chand Goyal, who was a ent vide his affidavit EX.RW-ce on account of rash and neglig t, who was driving the car No.H nd any infirmity in the award da t appeal is dismissed devoid of this Court extends its appreciat sistance to the Court in the pres ny, stands disposed of. UDEEPTI SHARMA) JUDGE ng

ded ed a Ltd.) sses r of 054, iver also 1/A gent HR-ated any tion