Punjab-Haryana High Court
Mohan Lal vs Mohinder Singh And Others on 12 March, 2024
Author: Alka Sarin
Bench: Alka Sarin
2024:PHHC:035511
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
137 CR No.1808 of 1993
Date of Decision : 12.03.2024
Mohan Lal ....Petitioner
VERSUS
Mohinder Singh and Others ....Respondents
CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ALKA SARIN
Present : Mr. Vinod K. Kataria, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. R.C. Gupta, Advocate
for respondent No.3-Insurance Company.
ALKA SARIN, J. (Oral)
1. The present revision petition has been preferred by the
petitioner aggrieved by the quantum of compensation awarded by the Motor
Accident Claims Tribunal, Faridkot (hereinafter referred to as the
'Tribunal') vide award dated 11.02.1993.
2. Since the facts, as recorded in the impugned award passed by
the Tribunal, are not in dispute, the same are not being reproduced herein for
the sake of brevity.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the
injured petitioner (since deceased) now represented by his legal heirs, was a
pillion rider on a scooter which met with an accident, which was insured
with the Insurance Company. The Tribunal held the petitioner (since
deceased) negligent to the extent of 50%. Learned counsel for the petitioner
would further contend that being a pillion rider the petitioner (since
integrity of this order/judgment
CR No.1808 of 1993 -2- 2024:PHHC:035511
deceased) could not possibly have been held to be responsible for the
accident in any manner. Learned counsel for the petitioner (since deceased)
has relied upon a judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of
Khenyei vs. New India Assurance Co. Ltd. [(2015) 9 SCC 273] to
contend that in case of composite negligence the compensation can be
claimed from either of the tortfeasors.
4. Per contra learned counsel for respondent No.3-Insurance
Company is not in a position to deny the fact that the petitioner (since
deceased) was a pillion rider.
5. Heard.
6. In view of the fact that since the petitioner (since deceased) was
a pillion rider, he cannot be held responsible for the accident in any manner
and hence there can be no contributory negligence on his part. The said
finding of the Tribunal is accordingly set aside.
7. Learned counsel for respondent No. 3-Insurance Company
states that he has instructions from Ms. Pushpa Bhardwaj, Regional
Manager, New India Assurance Company Ltd. to state that the respondent
No.3-Insurance Company is willing to offer an amount of Rs.60,000/- in all
over and above the amount already awarded by the Tribunal.
8. Learned counsel for the petitioner (since deceased) states that
he has instructions to accept the offer given by the respondent No.3-
Insurance Company.
9. In view of the above, the finding of the Tribunal qua the
contributory negligence is set aside and the impugned award stands modified
integrity of this order/judgment
CR No.1808 of 1993 -3- 2024:PHHC:035511
to the extent that the legal heirs of the petitioner are entitled to Rs.60,000/-
in all, over and above the amount already awarded by the Tribunal.
Respondent No.3-Insurance Company is directed to make the payment
within a period of 02 months from today failing which the legal heirs of the
petitioner shall be entitled to interest @ 6% per annum.
10. The revision petition stands disposed off in the above terms.
Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed off.
( ALKA SARIN )
12.03.2024 JUDGE
jk
NOTE: Whether speaking/non-speaking: Speaking
Whether reportable: YES/NO
integrity of this order/judgment
