CWP-18724-2026 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Sr. No.102 CM-9683-CWP-2026 in/and CWP-18724-2026 (O&M) Date of Decision: 01.07.2026 Cholamandalam MS General Insurance Co. Ltd. .... Petitioner Versus Permanent Lok Adalat (Public Utility Services), Sangrur and others .... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA Present: Ms. Surabhi Grover, Advocate, for the petitioner. TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA, J. (ORAL) CM-9683-CWP-2026 Application is allowed as prayed for. Main case The petition has been filed inter alia seeking a writ of certiorari setting aside the award passed by the Permanent Lok Adalat (PUS), Sangrur, dated 19.12.2024, Annexure P-1. 2. Facts of the case in brief are, the vehicle driven by the insured was hit by the offending vehicle/truck bearing registration no.JK-02AK- 1749, which was being driven in a rash and negligent manner. On that account, the insured received grievous multiple injuries and succumbed to those injuries in the hospital. An FIR no.28, dated 11.03.2019, under Sections 279, 337, 304A and 427 IPC was registered against the driver of the offending vehicle for rash and negligent driving. The matter went to the Permanent Lok Adalat, which has passed the impugned award, dated 19.12.2024, granting compensation of `2 lakh with interest at the rate of six MANINDER 2026.07.06 19:35 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment CWP-18724-2026 (O&M) 2 per cent per annum from the date of lodging of the claim. The operative part of the award reads as under: 11. As a result of above discussion, we are of the considered opinion that the respondents have wrongly repudiated the claim. There is no violation of terms and conditions of the insurance agreement. So the respondents are liable to pay the amount of insurance to the tune of Rs.2,00,000/-. The applicants have claimed Rs.3,00,000/- as amount of insurance, but according to the respondents the sum assured was Rs.2,00,000/- not Rs.3,00,000/-. In this regard, the respondents have placed on record the certificate of personal accident insurance, which shows that the death benefit is provided as Rs.2,00,000/-. The present application is allowed accordingly directing the respondents to pay Rs.2,00,000/- as amount of insurance alongwith interest @6% p.a. from the date of lodging of the claim, within three months from today, failing which the respondents shall pay the interest @12% p.a. They are also liable to pay Rs.10,000/- as cost of litigation. Award is passed accordingly. File be consigned to records. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner/Insurance Company contended that the compensation has been awarded by the Permanent Lok Adalat in violation of the insurance policy/Group Personal Accident Insurance Policy; the exclusion clause 3.6 whereof prescribes, ‘loss sustained or contracted in consequence of the Insured being under the influence of alcohol or drugs unless administered on the advice of a physician’ would not be entitled to the amount of interest. And as per the medical documents produced before the Permanent Lok Adalat on behalf of the petitioner, the insured was under the influence of alcohol at the time of accident. She has made reference to the In-patient case sheet, dated 11.03.2019, Annexure P-3, in support of the fact. 4. Considering the submissions, this Court finds no ground to entertain the petition. The aspect of the medical record indicating the MANINDER 2026.07.06 19:35 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment CWP-18724-2026 (O&M) 3 deceased under the influence of alcohol at the time of accident has been taken into account by the Permanent Lok Adalat, which is apparent from the following extract of the impugned award: 10. … No negligence has been attributed to the deceased Gurmeet Singh. There is nothing to show that the accident has taken place due to the fact that deceased Gurmeet Singh has lost control over his vehicle being under the influence of liquor. So any observation in the medical record that deceased was under intoxication at the time of accident, is of no relevance. Even the medical record to this effect, is also not convincing The respondents are not justified for rejecting the claim merely on the ground that the medical record mentions that deceased was under intoxication at that time without considering the fact whether the accident has taken place due to the reason the deceased had taken alcohol at the time of accident. 5. This Court is in agreement with the reasons recorded. Further, in terms of clause 3.6 of the Policy it is for the insurance company to establish that the accident occurred on account of the insured being under the influence of alcohol, which has not been done. Instead, it remains undisputed that the offending vehicle was being driven rashly and negligently, which hit the vehicle driven by the insured leading to his suffering multiple grievous injuries and the consequent death. 6. Accordingly, finding no merit in the petition, it stands dismissed. (TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA) JUDGE 01.07.2026 Maninder Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No MANINDER 2026.07.06 19:35 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment