LAWS(P&H)-2026-1-102

UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED Vs. MEENAKSHI

Decided On January 31, 2026
UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED Appellant
V/S
MEENAKSHI Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal has been preferred by the appellant assailing the award dtd. 11/11/2024 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Hisar , whereby the claim petition filed by the Respondents/Claimants for grant of compensation on account of death of Bajrang Sharma was allowed. Award amount of Rs.52,20,000.00 along with interest at rate of 7% per annum from the date of filing the claim petition till actual realisation.

(2.) The claimants' case is that on 21/9/2021, Bajrang Sharma was travelling as a pillion rider on a motorcycle driven by his nephew Pardeep. At about 9:30 a.m., near the South bypass road close to Jindal Factory overbridge, offending truck bearing No. HR-39B/4225, driven rashly and negligently, struck the motorcycle, resulting in Bajrang's death. On Pardeep's statement, FIR No. 839 dtd. 21/9/2021 under Ss. 279, 337, 304-A and 427 IPC was registered at P.S. Sadar, Hisar. After investigation, the police found respondent No.1 Manjeet negligent and filed a charge sheet under Sec. 173 Cr.P.C. It was asserted that the deceased was working as a Sales Manager with Edisafe Logistics Pvt. Ltd., earning Rs.30,000.00 per month, and his widow and two minor children filed the claim petition seeking compensation.

(3.) Respondents No.4 and 5 (Driver and Owner respectively) in their written statement, denied the occurrence of the accident, rash and negligent driving, and involvement of the truck. They disclaimed liability and pleaded that, if compensation was held payable, the same should be borne by respondent No.3, the insurer, as the vehicle was insured. They sought dismissal of the claim petition. Appellant-Insurance Company also contested the claim, raising objections regarding locus standi, maintainability and alleged collusion. It denied the accident, as well as the age and income of the deceased, alleging that a false FIR was registered in collusion to extract money. It further pleaded violation of policy terms and prayed for dismissal of the claim petition.