High Court of Punjab and HaryanaFAO/1532/2014disposed of

Dalbir Singh v. Surender And ORS

2018-05-22Lok Adalat Bench - 32 pages

FAO No.1532 of 2014 (O&M) -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.1532 of 2014 (O&M) Date of decision: 22.05.2018 Dalbir Singh .... Appellant

Versus

Surender and others ..... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN Present :

Mr.Rajinder Goyal, Advocate for the appellant.

Mr. Sandeep Dhull, Advocate for respondents No.1 and 2.

Mr.Suvir Dewan, Advocate for respondents No.3 and 5.

Mr.V.S.Rana, Advocate for respondent No.4.

**** Avneesh Jhingan, J.

The present appeal has been filed against the award dated 08.10.2013 passed by Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kaithal (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal').

Dalbir Singh, aged 40 years, suffered injuries in a motor vehicular accident that occurred on 17.01.2010. FIR No.6 dated 17.01.2010 was registered.

A claim petition under Section 163-A of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short, 'the Act') was filed.

The claim petition was dismissed by the Tribunal mainly on the ground that rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle was not Anju 2018.05.24 14:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document phhc

FAO No.1532 of 2014 (O&M) -2proved. Further, it was held that disability certificate Ex.P33 was not proved by way of examining the doctor.

So far as the first issue is concerned, the finding of the Tribunal cannot be upheld. There is no onus on the claimant to prove the rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle in claim petition filed under Section 163-A of the Act. So far as the second issue is concerned that the disability certificate was not proved, the appellants are given one more opportunity to adduce evidence in support of the disability certificate and to show that the disability suffered comes within the preview of IInd schedule of the Act.

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the matter is remitted back to the Tribunal to decide the issue regarding compensation in accordance with law.

Appeal is disposed of.

(AVNEESH JHINGAN) JUDGE 22.05.2018 anju 1.Whether the order is speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No 2.Whether the order is reportable :

Yes/No