Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

TARLOCHAN SINGH & ANR versus JOGINDER & ANR

High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Tarlochan Singh & Anr v. Joginder & Anr - FAO-5633-2005 [2006] RD-P&H 10357 (13 November 2006)

FAO No.5633 of 2005 (O&M) 1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

DATE OF DECISION: 15.9.2006

Tarlochan Singh and another

...Appellants

versus

Joginder and another

... Respondents

CORAM:- Hon'ble Mr. Justice Uma Nath Singh.
Hon'ble Mr.Justice Mahesh Grover.

Present: Mr.C.L.Verma, Advocate,

for the appellants.

UMA NATH SINGH, J. (ORAL)

In this FAO by the owner and driver of the offending vehicle, with 9 days' delay in refiling, against an award dated 30.7.2005 passed by learned Presiding Officer, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Hoshiarpur, in RBT MACT No.33/2004, awarding a sum of Rs.80,000/- in an injury case where the claimant suffered puncture of lung and remained on ventilation in the hospital, learned counsel submitted that the vehicle was falsely involved, as there was no eye witness account of the accident, and only on the basis of a news item, the vehicle has been framed up.

We have carefully considered the submission of learned counsel and we do not find any force therein for the reason that the claimant was travelling in the auto rickshaw of appellant No.2 at the time of accident, soon after he was removed from ventilation in the hospital, he lodged a report with the SSP, Jalandhar, giving detailed description of the vehicle and the accident. Absence of an eye witness in the accident cases FAO No.5633 of 2005 (O&M) 2

would not make a claim case unbelievable when the claimant himself is the author of the complaint. The compensation amount is only Rs.80,000/-, whereas the medical bills are to the tune of Rs.66,000/-.

Accordingly, we are not inclined to interfere with the impugned award. 9 days' delay in refiling the appeal is condoned for the reasons given in the application. The appeal is dismissed in limine.

( UMA NATH SINGH )

JUDGE

September 15, 2006 ( MAHESH GROVER )

pk JUDGE


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.