RANJIT KAUR Vs. PARMINDER SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This order will dispose of FAO Nos. 8717 of 2015 and 884 of 2016 as these have emerged out of the same award dated 25.9.2015 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Ludhiana (in short "the Tribunal") whereby compensation has been assessed on account of death of Rajinder Singh in a motor vehicular accident that took place on 17.11.2012. FAO No. 8717 of 2015 has been filed by the claimants seeking enhancement of compensation whereas the other appeal has been preferred by the Oriental Insurance Company Limited (hereinafter referred to as "the insurance company") to challenge the award. FAO No. 8717 of 2015 and FAO No. 884 of 2016

(2.) Counsel for the insurance company would argue that findings of the Tribunal on issue No. 1 pertaining to rash and negligent driving of Car No. PB 10BK-3451 driven by Parminder Singh are the result of misreading of evidence and can not be allowed to sustain. To bring home his contention, he has pointed out the averments raised in para 24 of the claim application, contents of FIR No. 267 dated 20.12.2012 lodged after more than one month of the occurrence on the statement of Ranjit Kaur widow of Rajinder Singh, one of the claimants and an eye witness to the occurrence and testimony of Ranjit Kaur examined to discharge onus of issue No. 1 as well as entitlement of the claimants to get compensation and compensation to be paid to them. It is further argued that in para 24 of the claim application, allegations with regard to rash and negligent driving have been attributed to an unknown vehicle that came at a fast speed from opposite direction and while coming on wrong side of the road struck against the car in which the deceased and his family members including Smt. Ranjit Kaur PW2 were travelling. Ranjit Kaur in her testimony on oath has reiterated the averments raised in para 24 of the claim application and admitted correctness of the facts recorded in her first version made to the police on 20.12.2012, on the basis whereof FIR Ex. PW2/1 was registered in Police Station Dakha District Ludhiana Rural. In addition, it is argued that Ranjit Kaur neither attributed any negligence to Parminder Singh while recording her first version on 20.12.2012 nor she initiated any criminal proceedings against said Parminder Singh. Statement made by Ranjit Kaur before the Tribunal does not make reference as to how driver of alleged offending car was rash or/and negligent in his driving or had failed to take reasonable care to avoid accident. He would submit that plea of the claimants that present is a case of composite negligence of alleged offending car and unknown vehicle can not be allowed to sustain in view of first version recorded by Ranjit Kaur and even her testimony before the Tribunal, therefore, findings of the Tribunal on issue No. 1 are liable to be set aside and claim application is liable to be rejected on this score alone.

(3.) Another submission made by counsel is that Rajinder Singh died on 20.12.2012 after about one month of the occurrence. Post mortem was conducted on 21.12.2012 by a Medical Board comprising Dr. Harpreet Negi, Dr. Harpreet and Dr. Baldeep Singh. The Medical Board opined that cause of death is due to shock as a result of chronic liver disease and its complications, sufficient to cause death in ordinary course of nature. It is further argued that Dr. Baldeep Singh one of the members of the Medical Board was examined by the claimants. In his statement by way of examination in chief, he has stated that patient was having underline chronic liver disease which got de-compensated due to the accident. It is argued that Dr. Baldeep Singh in the opening line of his cross examination has admitted, reads thus:-