Punjab-Haryana High Court
Balwant Singh vs Pardeep Kumar And Ors on 24 January, 2024
Author: Alka Sarin
Bench: Alka Sarin
2024:PHHC:009581
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
213
FAO-3880-2012 (O&M)
Date of Decision : 24.01.2024
BALWANT SINGH .... Petitioner
VERSUS
PARDEEP KUMAR & ORS. .... Respondents
CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ALKA SARIN
Present : Mr. Chand Ram Olla, Advocate for the appellant.
Mr. Rishabh Jain, Advocate for respondent No.2.
ALKA SARIN, J. (ORAL)
1. The present appeal has been preferred against the award dated
05.03.2012 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Hisar
(hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal') dismissing the claim petition filed
by the claimant-appellant herein.
2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant would
contend that the claim petition has erroneously been dismissed and that it
was amply proved on the record that the offending car bearing registration
No.HR-02G/6173 was involved in the accident.
3. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 on the other hand has
contended that in the first version of the accident which was recorded in
DDR No.12 dated 06.06.2004 (Ex. P-36), it was stated that a cow came in
front of the motorcycle and in order to save the stray cow the rider of the
motorcycle, namely, Pardeep Kumar applied brakes as a result of which the
motorcycle lost balance and the two pillion riders along with Pardeep Kumar
fell down. However, in the claim petition, a new story was introduced
integrity of this judgment/order.
213 FAO-3880-2012 (O&M) -2-
wherein car bearing registration No.HR-02G/6173 has been stated to be the
offending vehicle. Learned counsel has further contended that though it was
stated that the claimant-appellant along with Sonu Mishra and one Pardeep
Kumar were going on the motorcycle but this fact has been denied by Sonu
Mishra in his statement recorded as RW-1.
4. Heard.
5. In the present case, initially, a DDR was lodged being DDR
No.12 dated 06.06.2004 (Ex. P-36) which was recorded on the statement of
the claimant himself while he was admitted in General Hospital, Hisar. It
was stated in the DDR that on 06.06.2004 at about 6:30 am, Balwant Singh
(the claimant) along with his friends, namely, Pardeep Kumar son of Ruldu
Ram and Sonu Mishra were going to Village Bhagana on Hero Honda
Motorcycle belonging to Pardeep Kumar to attend the marriage of his (the
claimant's) friend. Pardeep Kumar was riding the motorcycle and he (the
claimant) along with Sonu Mishra were the pillion riders. When they
reached near Village Bus Stand Bhagana, a stray cow suddenly came in front
of the motorcycle. Pardeep Kumar, in order to save the cow, applied brakes
and as a result of the same they lost their balance and all three fell on the
road. The right leg of the claimant-appellant came under the motorcycle and
as a result of which he sustained injuries whereas Pardeep Kumar and Sonu
Mishra did not sustain any injury. In the claim petition a different version
was put forward. It was stated in the claim petition that while Pardeep
Kumar, Sonu Mishar and Balwant Singh (the claimant-appellant herein)
were going on a motorcycle to attend marriage of his (the claimant's) friend
integrity of this judgment/order.
213 FAO-3880-2012 (O&M) -3-
and when they reached near Bus Stand of Village Bhagana, a cow suddenly
came in front of the motorcycle. Meanwhile, a car bearing registration
No.HR-02G/6173 also emerged on the scene and the driver of the
motorcycle and the car tried to save the cow and applied brakes. As a result
of which the occupants of the motorcycle fell on the ground and the claimant
sustained injuries. It is apt to note that there is no allegation of rash and
negligent driving on the part of the driver of the alleged offending vehicle
i.e. car bearing registration No.HR-02-G/6173. Further still, one of the
pillion rider, namely, Sonu Mishra, while stepping into the witness box as
RW-1 has given a different story and has gone to the extent of saying that on
06.02.2004 he never went with the injured-claimant or Pardeep Kumar to
attend the marriage of their friend. The Tribunal has further noticed in the
award that even the identity of Pardeep Kumar was not established. Learned
counsel for the appellant has not been able to convince this Court as to how
the claim petition has wrongly been dismissed. No illegality or irregularity
in the impugned award has been pointed out.
6. In view of the above, I do not find any merit in the present
appeal and the same is accordingly dismissed Pending applications, if any,
also stand disposed off.
24.01.2024 (ALKA SARIN)
Aman Jain JUDGE
NOTE: Whether speaking/non-speaking: Speaking
Whether reportable: YES/NO
integrity of this judgment/order.
