Union Of India Through Secretary vs Vikram Sharma
2026 Latest Caselaw 433 J&K

Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Union Of India Through Secretary vs Vikram Sharma on 6 February, 2026

Author: Sanjeev Kumar

Bench: Sanjeev Kumar

                                                                   Sr. No.2026:JKLHC-JMU:235
                                                                           10

                                                                   3
        HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
                        AT JAMMU

MA No. 373/2012 c/w
MA No. 374/2012
MA No. 375/2012
                                                  Pronounced on : 06.02.2026
                                                  Uploaded on : 09.02.2026
MA No. 373/2012

1. Union of India through Secretary,                            .....Appellant(s)
   Ministry of Defence,
   Govt. of India, New Delhi.
2. Officer Commanding 58 RCC GREF,
   C/o 56 APO.

                                   Through :- Mr. R S Jamwal, CGSC

                        v/s
1. Vikram Sharma, S/o Ashok Kumar,                            .....Respondent(s)
   R/o Agrati, Tehsil & District Rajouri.
2. Kishore Kumar No: 148140/83-F,
   58 RCC GREF Camp, Bathuni,
   Driver of Water Tank No. 06ZE/68755.

                                   Through :- Mr. Dewakar Sharma, Advocate


MA No. 374/2012

1. Union of India through Secretary,                           ..... Appellant(s)
   Ministry of Defence,
   Govt. of India, New Delhi.
2. Officer Commanding 58 RCC GREF,
   C/o 56 APO.

                                   Through :- Mr. R S Jamwal, CGSC

                        v/s
1. Sat Pal, S/o Sita Ram,                                     .....Respondent(s)
2. Kelash Devi, W/o Sat Pal,
3. Neeraj Kumar, S/o Sat Pal,
   All residents of Doongi Grati Deharlan,
   Tehsil & District Rajouri.
4. Kishore Kumar No: 148140/83-F,                      .....Performa Respondent
   58 RCC GREF Camp, Bathuni,
 MA No. 373/2012 c/w
MA No. 374/2012                                                             2026:JKLHC-JMU:235
MA No. 375/2012                        2

     Driver of Water Tank No. 06ZE/68755.


                                    Through :- Mr. Dewakar Sharma, Advocate
MA No. 375/2012

1. Union of India through Secretary,                               ..... Appellant(s)
   Ministry of Defence,
   Govt. of India, New Delhi.
2. Officer Commanding 58 RCC GREF,
   C/o 56 APO.

                                    Through :- Mr. R S Jamwal, CGSC

                         v/s
1. Vikas Sharma, S/o Chander Parkash,                            .....Respondent(s)
   R/o Agrati, Tehsil & District Rajouri.
2. Kishore Kumar No: 148140/83-F,                         .....Performa Respondent
   58 RCC GREF Camp, Bathuni,
   Driver of Water Tank No. 06ZE/68755.

                                    Through :- Mr. Dewakar Sharma, Advocate


CORAM:        HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR, JUDGE

                               ORDER (ORAL)

06.02.2026

1. In all these three appeals, the Union of India and the Officer

Commanding 58 RCC GREF have thrown challenge to a composite

award dated 16.05.2012 passed by the Motor Accident Claims

Tribunal ["the Tribunal"], Rajouri in, File No. 39/Claim titled

"Sat Pal & Ors. Vs. Union of India & Ors.", File No. 79/Claim

titled "Vikas Sharma Vs. Union of India & Ors.", File No.

80/Claim titled "Vikram Sharma Vs. Union of India & Ors.",

whereby the Tribunal has awarded a sum of ₹ 4,31,000/- in File No.

39/Claim, ₹ 4,00,000/- in File No. 79/Claim and ₹ 7,00,000/- in MA No. 373/2012 c/w MA No. 374/2012 2026:JKLHC-JMU:235

File No. 80/Claim, respectively along with interest @ 7% per

annum from the date of petition till the amount is realized.

2. Briefly stating, the facts leading to the filing of these appeals are

that, on 16.04.2008 deceased Sushant Kumar Sharma, injured Vikas

Sharma and Vikram Sharma were riding on a motorcycle bearing

Registration No. JK02W/7078. The motorcycle was being driven by

the injured Vikas Sharma on Jammu-Poonch National Highway. At

a distance of about 6/7 Kms away from Rajouri, the motorcycle

carrying aforesaid three persons met with an accident with a Water-

tanker of GREF bearing Registration No. 06ZE/68755, which at the

relevant point of time was driven by one Kishore Kumar. As a

result of this collision between the Water-tanker and the

motorcycle, one pillion rider Sushant Kumar Sharma died, whereas

the other two, namely, Vikas Sharma and Vikram Sharma suffered

multiple injuries.

3. The legal heirs of Sushant Kumar Sharma filed claim petition

registered as File No. 39/Claim, for seeking compensation from the

appellants herein and driver Kishore Kumar, on the ground that the

death of pillion rider Sushant Kumar Sharma had happened due to a

motor accident committed by the driver of the Water-tanker namely

Kishore Kumar by driving the offending vehicle in a rash and

negligent manner. Two similar petitions were also filed by Vikas

Sharma and Vikram Sharma, who suffered injuries in the same

accident. The claim petitions were contested by the appellants

herein, primarily on the ground that, the accident in which Sushant MA No. 373/2012 c/w MA No. 374/2012 2026:JKLHC-JMU:235

Kumar Sharma lost his life and claimants Vikas Sharma and

Vikram Sharma received serious injuries had occurred due to the

negligent driving of the motorcycle by its driver Vikas Sharma and

not because of any rash and negligent act of the driver of the GREF,

Kishore Kumar.

4. On the basis of pleadings of the parties, the Tribunal, inter alia,

framed the issues, one with regard to the negligence of the driver of

the offending vehicle, resulting into an accident in which one

Sushant Kumar Sharma died and Vikas Sharma and Vikram

Sharma were injured. There was a separate issue framed as to the

amount of compensation to which the claimants in each petition

were entitled to.

5. With a view to prove Issue No. 1, the onus whereof, was on the

claimants, the claimants produced PW Sat Pal, PW Ravi Kumar and

PW Vicky Kumar. They were also the witnesses with regard to the

quantum of the compensation which the claimants in each petition

were entitled to. The appellants herein also led their evidence in

rebuttal and produced RW Anil Kumar and RW Kishore Kumar,

the driver of the offending vehicle. The Tribunal having considered

the evidence led by both the sides as also the other documentary

evidence on record, came to the conclusion that the claimants had

successfully proved Issue No. 1 and it was amply demonstrated that

on the fateful date of 16.04.2008, the motor accident between the

motorcycle and the offending Water-tanker occurred due to rash

and negligent driving by the driver of the offending vehicle namely MA No. 373/2012 c/w MA No. 374/2012 2026:JKLHC-JMU:235

Kishore Kumar. The Tribunal, thereafter, proceeded to work out the

compensation payable to the claimants in light of the legal position

settled in the judgment rendered by the Supreme Court in case titled

"Mrs. Sarla Verma & Ors. Vs. Delhi Transport Corp. & Anr."

[AIR 2009 SC 3104] and allowed all the claim petitions in terms of

the award impugned in the different sums as indicated above.

6. The impugned award is assailed by the appellants, only on the

ground that, the Tribunal has failed to consider that the accident had

occurred due to the sheer negligence of the driver of the motorcycle

and not because of any rash or negligent driving of the Water-

tanker by Kishore Kumar owned by the appellants. Strong reliance

was placed upon the statement made by RW Kishore Kumar to

substantiate the aforesaid ground of challenge prominently urged in

all these appeals by the appellants. There was, however, no serious

challenge to the amount awarded by the Tribunal to the claimants in

all the three claim petitions.

7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties at length and perused

the material available on record, I am of the considered opinion

that the impugned award passed by the Tribunal is legally and

factually correct and does not call for any interference in these

appeals. It is true that the appellants before the Tribunal had taken

a stand that the accident in question had happened due to rash and

negligent driving of the motorcycle driven by Vikas Sharma and to

substantiate, they also produced RW Kishore Kumar as their

witness. The Tribunal had considered the statement of RW Kishore MA No. 373/2012 c/w MA No. 374/2012 2026:JKLHC-JMU:235

Kumar and has rightly not given any credence for the reason that

RW Kishore Kumar is none other than the driver of the offending

vehicle and, therefore, was not expected to admit his guilt. He was

most likely to shift the blame to the other vehicle which was hit by

him because of his rash and negligent driving of the Water-tanker.

The appellants have not taken pains to place on record any other

documentary evidence, in particular, copy of the FIR or the

Challan, to show that it was Vikas Sharma who was prosecuted for

negligent driving and not the driver of the offending vehicle-Water-

tanker i.e. Kishore Kumar.

8. In the face of aforesaid evidence brought on record by the

appellants and the statement of PW Sat Pal, PW Ravi Kumar and

PW Vicky Kumar, the Tribunal had no other option but to hold the

Issue No. 1 proved in favour of the claimants and against the

appellants herein.

9. For all these reasons, I find no merit in these appeals and the

same are, accordingly, dismissed.

10. The amount so deposited by the Appellants before this Court shall

be released in favour of the claimants in terms of the order

impugned, after due verification and identification.

(Sanjeev Kumar) Judge JAMMU 06.02.2026 Manan

Whether the order is speaking : Yes/No Whether the order is reportable : Yes/No