FAO-2963-2015 [229] Mamta Dev Gaurav and Coram : Present: PANKAJ J [1] of death of [2] the Motor observing 2015 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF AT CHANDIGA FAO-2963 Date of De ta Devi @ Mandeep Kaur and others versus av and others HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PA Mr. Bhag Singh, Advocate for Mr. Vinay Kumar Arya, Advo Mr. Rajbir Singh, Advocate for respondent No.4-Ins.Co. **** KAJ JAIN, J. (ORAL) Appellants are the claimants s ath of Gurpreet Singh in a motor vehic The claim petition filed by th otor Vehicles Act, 1988 has been rving as under:- “23. However, the claimants l PMR to establish that deceased question and died thereof. The and Ex.PC respectively) sho challaned and facing trial for c not definite and conclusive pi establish that death of deceased the injuries suffered in acciden that Tribunal is to come at findin evidence like copies of charge sh T OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA DIGARH 2963-2015 (O&M) of Decision : 09.03.2026 others …Appellants ….Respondents PANKAJ JAIN ate for the appellants. Advocate for respondent No.1. for Mr. Sanjeev Goyal, Advocat ants seeking compensation on accou r vehicular accident dated 21.11.2013. by the claimants under Section 166 o been dismissed by the Tribunal whi nts led no evidence in shape of MLR ased suffered injuries in the accident The challan and charge-sheet (Ex. P showing respondent No.1-driver for causing death of Gurpreet Singh, e piece of evidence in themselves ased Gurpreet Singh took place due ident in question. It is well establish indings on the evidence led before it an e sheet, challan of criminal case are n 1 vocate account .2013. 166 of while LR or ent in x. PD er is gh, is ves to due to lished it and re not RAJNEESH SHARMA 2026.03.13 15:07 I agree to specified portions of this document FAO-2963-2015 [3] is the absen accident an [4] application additional Annexure A [5] dismissed o record to accident, appellate st sought to b evidence. set aside. Gurpreet S 2015 (O&M) conclusive piece of evidence, th piece of evidence. In present certified copy of MLR or PMR conducted post mortem on the de conclusive piece of evidence to place from the injuries suffered account of PWs is not sufficient establish injuries or death as suffered in the accident. The material nexus between accid consequence thereof.” The only reason for which the e absence of evidence to establish th ent and the death of the deceased. Along with the present appe cation under Order XLI Rule 27 C ional evidence in order to prove the xure A along with the application. Keeping in view the fact th issed only on account of absence o d to establish the causal relations ent, this Court finds that the eviden llate stage is necessary for just adjudic ht to be produced is a public docum nce. Consequently, the findings reco . It is held in terms of the po reet Singh died on account of the e, they may be taken as corroborati sent case, only medical evidence i MR or statement of medical expert wh he dead body of deceased, were best an e to establish that the death had tak red in the accident in question. The or ient and conclusive piece of evidence as consequence of injuries, alleged he claimants, thus, failed to establi accident and injuries and death ich the appellants have been non-suite the causal relationship between th t appeal, the claimants have filed 27 CPC seeking permission to lea ve the postmortem report appended act that the claim petition has bee ence of the postmortem report/medic lationship between the death and th evidence sought to be adduced at th adjudication of the case. The docume document and is per se admissible gs recorded by the Tribunal are hereb the postmortem report that deceased of the motor vehicular accident date 2 rative ce i.e. rt who st and taken e oral nce to egedly stablish th as suited een the filed an to lead nded as as been medical and the at the cument sible in hereby eceased- nt dated RAJNEESH SHARMA 2026.03.13 15:07 I agree to specified portions of this document FAO-2963-2015 21.11.2013 [6] report. Th deceased is the decease as per the m date i.e. ₹ Multiplier o expenses is others vers (Civil) 77 amount of entitled fo funeral exp [7] 7% per an 13.03.2013 [8] [9] disposed of 09.03.2026 ‘R. Sharma' 2015 (O&M) .2013 due to the rash and negligent dr The deceased was 35 years The date of accident is 21.11.2 ased is claimed to be a milk vendor, eceased is assessed as a skilled labour r the minimum wages notified by the ₹ 5731/- per month. Future pros iplier of ‘16’ needs to be applied. De nses is made in terms of ratio of law versus Delhi Transport Corporat il) 77. There are four claimants. Eac nt of Rs.48,400/- for loss of consort led for an amount of Rs.18,000/- for l ral expenses. The aforesaid awarded compen per annum from the date of instit .2013 till the date of actual realization The appeal stands disposed of All pending miscellaneous a ed off. .2026 Whether speaking/ reasoned Whether reportable ent driving of respondent No.1. years of age as per the postmorte 1.11.2013. As per the pleadings, th ndor, though there is no evidence, labour and his income is being assesse by the State of Haryana for the releva re prospects of 40% need to be adde d. Deduction of 1/4th towards person of law laid down in Sarla Verma an poration and another’, 2009(3) RC s. Each of them is held entitled for a onsortium. The claimants are also he for loss of estate and Rs.18,000/- ompensation shall also carry interest @ institution of the claim petition i. lization. sed off in the above terms. eous application(s), if any, stands (PANKAJ JAIN) JUDGE : Yes/No : Yes/No 3 tmortem gs, the but assessed relevant added. personal ma and 3) RCR d for an lso held for terest @ tion i.e. tands RAJNEESH SHARMA 2026.03.13 15:07 I agree to specified portions of this document