United India Insurance Company ... vs Jasbir Kaur And Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 1080 P&H

(117) FAO No. 89 of 2023 (O&M)                                             -1-


IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
              CHANDIGARH

                                              FAO No. 89 of 2023 (O&M)
                                              Date of decision: 18.01.2023

United India Insurance Company Ltd.                          ...... Appellant.

                                   Versus

Smt. Jasbir Kaur and others                                 .... Respondents.


CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL

Present:-    Mr. D.P. Gupta, Advocate, for the appellant.

                                 ****

ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL, J. (ORAL)

The appellant has challenged the Award dated 07.10.2022

passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Chandigarh.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the first claim

petition had been withdrawn by the claimants without any liberty to file a

fresh one and, therefore, the second claim petition was not maintainable.

Order 23 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 ('CPC' - for short) bars a fresh

petition on the same cause of action. He has relied upon the judgment of this

Court in the case of Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. versus Krishna Devi

and others, FAO No. 5273 of 2009, decided on 19.02.2016. The vehicle has

been wrongly implicated, as the number was incorrectly mentioned and,

therefore, the liability could not be fastened on the appellant-Insurance

Company. There could have been further deductions from the income of the

deceased as reflected in the salary slip of the deceased.

Heard.

The claim petition had been preferred by the mother, widow and

1 of 3

children of the deceased, who had expired in an accident which took place on

10.08.2014, as his Activa was hit by a car being driven in a rash and

negligent manner. The age of the deceased was 42 years at that time and it

was stated, in the claim petition, that the monthly income of the deceased was

`50,000/-. The Tribunal while relying upon his salary slip after deducting

the income tax had considered income of the deceased to be `39,712/- per

month.

Learned counsel for the appellant has not been able to point out

that the compensation is excessive under any of the heads but submits that

further deductions had to be carried out from his salary. The gross salary of

the deceased was `41,212/- and deduction towards income tax of an amount

of `1,500/- had been made from his salary and the income was assessed as

`39,712/-. The deduction towards income tax had already been made and

other deductions from the salary cannot be excluded while determining the

income of the deceased.

The claimants had earlier preferred a claim petition in District

Mohali, but the same had been withdrawn and they had thereafter preferred a

petition at Chandigarh. The earlier claim petition had not been decided on

merits and it had been simply dismissed as withdrawn. The Motor Vehicles

Act, 1988 ('MV Act' - for short), is a welfare legislation and the claim ought

not to be rejected on hyper technical grounds. It would not be in the interest

of justice to reject the claim on this ground. It is true that the Rules of the

CPC are applicable to the MV Act, but it is to be borne in mind that the rules

of the procedure have to be interpreted in a manner which enhances the

object of justice. The rules of procedure are handmaid of justice and are

2 of 3

meant to aid and advance justice and not to thwart it.

I do not also find any merit in the contention of learned counsel

for the appellant that the vehicle had not been properly identified. In the FIR,

the number of the vehicle may not be mentioned, but later on the vehicle had

been identified and the number had been mentioned. A finding of fact has

been recorded in this regard by the Tribunal and without any cogent material

to the contrary I would not disturb it.

Consequently, I do not find any merit in this appeal which stands

dismissed.

The amount, which has been deposited by the appellant before

this Court, be sent to the Tribunal concerned for disbursal thereof to the

claimants.

Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.

                                           (ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL)
18.01.2023                                            JUDGE
Ramesh

                   Whether speaking/reasoned          :     Yes/No
                   Whether reportable                 :     Yes/No




                                 3 of 3