Rohtash vs Shazaad Ahmad And Ors
2024 Latest Caselaw 8416 P&H

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Rohtash vs Shazaad Ahmad And Ors on 22 April, 2024

Author: Alka Sarin

Bench: Alka Sarin

                                                                                 2024:PHHC:054282

                         IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH


                        526                                         FAO No.5651 of 2010 (O&M)
                                                                    Date of Decision : 22.04.2024


                        Rohtash                                                        ....Appellant

                                                         VERSUS

                        Shazaad Ahmad and Others                                    ....Respondents


                        CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ALKA SARIN


                        Present :   Mr. Tajveer Singh Gaba, Advocate for
                                    Mr. Munish Kumar Garg, Advocate for the appellant.

                                    Mr. Suvir Dewan, Advocate for respondent No.3.

                                    Mr. Vipul Sharma, Advocate for
                                    Mr. P.S. Saini, Advocate for respondent No.6.


                        ALKA SARIN, J. (Oral)

1. The present appeal has been preferred by the claimant-appellant

aggrieved by the award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jind

(hereinafter referred to as the 'Tribunal') whereby claim of the claimant-

appellant for compensation on account of damages to his vehicle Mahendra

Jeep bearing registration No.HR-56-4132 was dismissed.

2. The claimant-appellant filed a claim petition claiming damages

to his vehicle on the ground that Rs.1,05,000/- had been spent by him on the

repair and replacement of new parts. It was the case set up by the claimant-

appellant that spot survey was conducted by HC Mahesh Chand and a report

was issued on 26.04.2008 qua Mahendra Jeep bearing registration No.HR-

56-4132. It was further the case set up that the vehicle remained parked in

integrity of this order/judgment

FAO No.5651 of 2010 -2- 2024:PHHC:054282

the workshop/mechanic shops of various famous mechanics and that he

spent Rs.1,05,000/- on its repair. Some photographs were also produced

which were marked as Mark 20 and Mark 21. In his cross-examination the

claimant-appellant admitted that he never moved any application to the

Insurance Company regarding the claim for his vehicle repairs.

3. The Tribunal held that there was no evidence on the record qua

the damages to the vehicle. No bills for repairs were produced on the record

to indicate the extent of the damage or the repairs which were carried out. In

the absence of any evidence, the claim of the claimant-appellant was rightly

dismissed by the Tribunal.

4. In view of the above, I do not find any illegality or infirmity in

the impugned award passed by the Tribunal. The present appeal being

devoid of any merit is accordingly dismissed. Pending applications, if any,

also stand disposed off.

( ALKA SARIN ) 22.04.2024 JUDGE jk

NOTE: Whether speaking/non-speaking: Speaking Whether reportable: YES/NO

integrity of this order/judgment