The Punjab and Haryana High Court awards compensation based on an overall view of the rules and regulations governing a vehicle driven on the road.
TITLE – Tata AIG General Insurance Company Limited v.
Sarabjit Kaur and Others
Decided On- March 7, 2022
(2022) 4 RCR (Civil) 543
CORAM: RAJBHR SHERAWAT
INTRODUCTION – The Punjab and Haryana High Court, granted by Justice Rajbhir Sherawat, has provided distinctive compensation to the claimants and insurance company by the following rules and regulations.
FACTS OF THE CASE
In an Innova car with the license plate DL-10-CE-2458, Jitender Singh, Amarjeet Singh, Narender Pal Singh, Raminder Singh, Kuldeep Singh, and Harbhajan Singh were traveling from Delhi to Amritsar. While Amarjeet Singh was driving the car, Kuldeep Singh and Harbhajan Singh were seated in the back seat. The truck/tanker bearing registration number MP-09-HG-9347, which was traveling in front of the Innova car as they approached the area between Pipli and Shahbad on the national highway, abruptly applied brakes. The accident happened as a result. The Innova vehicle’s occupants suffered critical injuries as a result of the collision. Amarjeet Singh passed away at the LNJP Hospital in Kurukshetra, but Jitender Singh, Raminder Singh, and Narinder Pal Singh died as a result of their wounds on the scene. Harbhajan Singh lived but was hurt. At Police Station Sadar, Thanesar, a criminal case with FIR No. 46 dated 6.2.2014 was also filed due to the accident. A complaint had been made in the aforementioned case against respondent No. 1, the alleged negligent tanker driver. The legal representatives of the deceased filed four claim petitions in the aforementioned set of circumstances, and the injured party himself filed a fifth for injuries he sustained in the accident.
COURT ANALYSIS AND DECISION
The court has heard the arguments of both parties and in view of all the respective regulations. the assertions made by the claimants, which have been duly supported by their evidence, have gone totally un-rebutted on the part of the respondents. Even the respondent Insurance company has not led any evidence of any kind to rebut the assertions of the claimants that the accident had taken place due to the negligence of the driver of the offending tanker. Once; being a respondent, they had taken a plea of negligence of the driver of the Innova car, then it was incumbent upon them to substantiate such assertion by leading positive evidence. However, the respondents-Insurance company have failed in proving those assertions made in their written statements the Counsel for the respondent has relied upon Regulation No. 23 of the Regulations of 1989, this was not a substantive ground for the claimant to not receive compensation as well as the appellant was not absolved to pay compensation to the insurance company. Therefore, the Hon’ble court has held The respondent Insurance company is held liable for 70% of the liability, leaving the appellant Insurance company with 30% of the liability to reimburse the claimants.
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”
Written by- Steffi Desousa
