FAO-3280-2004 IN T 211 Romesh Chander Sarabjit Singh an CORAM: HON Present: Mr. for t Resp ex- Serv 21.0 **** AMARINDER S 1. The challenging the Claims Tribunal whereby the clai Motor Vehicles A been dismissed. 2. Brie 7:00 PM, Rajiv K on scooter bearin When they reach behind a tract 2004 (O&M) -1-



IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJ AT CHANDIGA hander Sharma and another Versus and others HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AMARIN Mr. R.P. Dhir, Advocate for the appellants. Respondent No.2-Insurance Compan -parte vide order dated 01.05.2026 Service of respondents No.1 and 3 21.02.2025. **** DER SINGH GREWAL, J. The instant appeal has been fi g the award dated 05.12.2003 passe ibunal, Nawanshahr (hereinafter refe he claim petition preferred by the ap icles Act, 1988 seeking compensation ssed. Briefly stated, the case of the appell ajiv Kumar, son of the appellants, alo bearing registration No.PB-08-L-2554 reached near the bus stand of village tractor-trolley, a matador bearin PUNJAB AND HARYANA
DIGARH FAO-3280-2004 (O&M) Reserved on:08.05.2026 Pronounced on:20.05.2026 Uploaded on:21.05.2026 …Appellants …Respondents ARINDER SINGH GREWAL ompany proceeded against 5.2026. and 3 dispensed with vide order da een filed by the appellants-claima passed by the learned Motor Accid er referred to as the learned Tribun the appellants under Section 166 of nsation for death of son of appellants, appellants is that on 01.11.1996 at ab ts, along with Iqbal Singh, was travell 2554 towards village Binjon via Ban village Bahar Majra and were proceed bearing registration No.PB-07-C-
2026 ents der dated claimants Accident Tribunal) 66 of the llants, has 6 at about travelling ia Banga. roceeding -0460 PANKAJ KUMAR 2026.05.21 16:24 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court Chandigarh FAO-3280-2004 (hereinafter refe respondent No.1 against their sco trolley moving a and were shifted brought dead. A The claim petitio learned Tribunal, 3. Lea the learned Trib statements record law that finding proceedings. It w and examined be had hit their sco with the tractor rash and negligen that the learned AW-9 Madan M police was condu 01.11.1996, thou upon the testimo whose version, a than the stateme AW-6 Hari Kris 2004 (O&M) -2-



r referred to as “the offending veh t No.1 in a rash and negligent mann ir scooter. Owing to the impact, the ving ahead of it. Both the occupants s shifted to Civil Hospital, Phagwara, ad. An FIR with respect to the incid petition filed by the appellants, how ibunal, giving rise to the present appea Learned counsel appearing on beh d Tribunal committed a grave err recorded before the Criminal Court, indings recorded in criminal procee s. It was argued that Iqbal Singh, who ned before the Tribunal, categorically ir scooter from behind, as a consequ actor-trolley moving ahead. The said egligent driving on the part of responde arned Tribunal wrongly drew an adv dan Mohan did not come forward to g conducting investigation and recordi though he was present there. Rather estimony of Iqbal Singh, being the so sion, according to learned counsel, d tatements of other witnesses. It was ri Krishan had been discarded on w g vehicle”), allegedly being driven manner, came from behind and stru ct, the scooter rammed into the trac pants sustained injuries in the occurre wara, where Rajiv Kumar was decl e incident was registered on 17.11.19 , however, came to be dismissed by appeal. n behalf of the appellants contended t e error in placing reliance upon Court, despite the settled proposition proceedings are not binding upon c , who was himself injured in the accid ically deposed that the offending mata onsequence whereof the scooter collid e said testimony sufficiently establis spondent No.1. It was further submit an adverse inference from the fact t rd to get recorded his statement when recording statements of other persons Rather, emphasis ought to have been the sole eye witness and injured witne nsel, deserved greater evidentiary va t was also argued that the testimony on wholly untenable grounds mer
riven by nd struck e tractor- ccurrence declared .11.1996. ed by the nded that upon the osition of pon civil e accident g matador ollided stablished submitted fact that when the ersons on been laid witness, ary value imony of s merely PANKAJ KUMAR 2026.05.21 16:24 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court Chandigarh FAO-3280-2004 because he faile matador. 4. On submitted that t additionally enga besides being a Rs.21,000/- per m at the time of acc made, in view Insurance Co. L after deducting o to have been app (2009) 6 SCC 12 5. Serv dated 21.02.2025 against ex parte v 6. I ha through the pape 7. The the FIR came to the statement of Hari Singh was s that photographs them. However, Tribunal. He fu 2004 (O&M) -3-



e failed to disclose the registration On the quantum of compensation, that the deceased was serving as y engaged as a Radio and Television ing a Singer, Actor and Compose per month. It was contended that sinc of accident, an addition of 50% towar view of the judgment of the Hon o. Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi (2017) 1 ting one-third amount towards person en applied in terms of the judgment r C 121. Service upon respondents No.1 and 2.2025, whereas respondent No.2–In parte vide order dated 01.05.2026. I have heard learned counsel for e paper book with his able assistance. The accident in question admittedly me to be registered only on 17.11.199 ent of Madan Mohan. He stated that was standing outside his shop when graphs of the scooter, tractor-trolley ever, no such photographs were e He further admitted that the driver ration numbers of the scooter and ation, learned counsel for the appella g as a Government Teacher and w vision Artist with All India Doordars mposer, thereby earning approximat at since the deceased was 35 years of towards future prospects was liable to Hon’ble Supreme Court in Natio 7) 16 SCC. It was further argued t personal expenses, multiplier of 16 ou ment rendered in Sarla Verma Vs. D .1 and 3 was dispensed with vide or Insurance Company was proceed l for the appellants and carefully go ance. ittedly occurred on 01.11.1996, wher .11.1996, i.e. after a delay of 16 days, d that at the relevant time he along w when the alleged accident took place trolley and matador were also taken ere ever produced before the lear river of the offending vehicle, nam
and the appellants and was ordarshan oximately ars of age able to be ational gued that 16 ought s. DTC ide order roceeded ully gone , whereas days, on long with place and taken by e learned , namely PANKAJ KUMAR 2026.05.21 16:24 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court Chandigarh FAO-3280-2004 Sarabjit Singh, w uncle’s family. D next day, no sati days in lodging 8. Sign recorded the sta declared fit to m categorically stat coming from the scooter to move nowhere alleged matador. Moreov scooter, tractor- the registration appearing before narrated by him t while overtaking involved in the witness does not 9. Ther recorded by a Nevertheless, a c circumstances a determining civi Tribunal has rig 2004 (O&M) -4-



ngh, was already known to him and t mily. Despite having knowledge rega no satisfactory explanation was furnis ging the FIR. Significantly, on the very day of he statement of injured pillion ride t to make a statement by the attendin stated that while overtaking the tra m the opposite side flashed into the move towards the right side and strike lleged that the scooter had been h oreover, AW-6 Hari Singh, who a -trolley and matador involved in t ration number of the scooter. Like before the Criminal Court, reiterated him to the police during investigation rtaking the tractor-trolley, thereby ind n the occurrence. Consequently, the es not inspire confidence. There is no quarrel with the settle by a criminal court are not ipso f ss, a civil court is certainly entitled t ces and admissions emerging from g civil liability. In the considered o as rightly appreciated the evidence and that the deceased was related to e regarding the occurrence on the v furnished for the inordinate delay of day of the occurrence, the police h n rider Iqbal Singh after he had b ttending doctor. In the said statement, the tractor-trolley, the lights of a vehi to the eyes of the deceased, causing d strike against a kikkar tree. Notably, een hit from behind by the offend who allegedly took photographs of ed in the accident, failed even to discl . Likewise, AW-7 Iqbal Singh, wh terated substantially the same version igation, namely that the accident occur by indicating that no other vehicle w , the testimony of the sole alleged settled proposition of law that findi so facto binding upon a civil co titled to take into consideration the fa from the criminal proceedings wh ered opinion of this Court, the lear dence available on record and correc
ted to his the very lay of 16 olice had had been ement, he a vehicle using the otably, he offending hs of the o disclose h, while ersion as t occurred hicle was leged eye t findings vil court. the facts, gs while e learned correctly PANKAJ KUMAR 2026.05.21 16:24 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court Chandigarh FAO-3280-2004 concluded that driving on the pa the claim petition 10. In v Court does not impugned award the present appea 11. Pend May 20, 2026 Pankaj* 2004 (O&M) -5-



that the appellants miserably failed the part of the driver of the offending etition calls for no interference. In view of the aforesaid discussion not find any illegality, perversit award dated 05.12.2003 passed by th appeal, being devoid of merit, is hereb Pending application(s), if any, shall (AMARIN Whether speaking/reaso Whether reportable iled to establish rash and neglig nding vehicle. Consequently, dismissa ussion and attending circumstances, t rversity or material irregularity in by the learned Tribunal. Consequen s hereby dismissed. , shall also stand disposed of. ARINDER SINGH GREWAL) JUDGE g/reasoned : Yes/No : Yes/No
negligent smissal of nces, this ty in the equently, PANKAJ KUMAR 2026.05.21 16:24 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court Chandigarh