Kuldip Kaur etc. Vs. Harmandeep Singh and another Page No.
In the Court of Sh. Amarinder Singh Grewal,
Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kapurthala (UID No.PB0037)
CNR No. PBKP010001512020 Case No. MACP/2/2020
Presented on : 09-01-2020
Registered on : 09-01-2020
Decided on : 23-11-2023
1. Kuldip Kaur aged about 33 years wife of Ranjit Singh.
2. Prempreet Kaur aged about 03 years minor daughter of Ranjit
Singh.
3. Gurmit Kaur aged about 67 years wife of Gurdial Singh.
Petitioner No.2 is minor as such suing through her mother and
natural guardian petitioner No.1 having no interest against the minor.
All residents of Alamgir, Kala Sanghian, Kapurthala.
…….Claimants/Petitioners.
Versus
1. Harmandeep Singh son of Mohinderpal Singh, resident of VPO
Mohablipur, District Kapurthala.
(Driver of car No.PB-09-R-0217).
2. Manjeet Kaur wife of Parduman Singh, resident of village Kalu
Bhatia, PO Burewal, District Kapurthala.
(Owner of car No.PB-09-R-0217).
3. Oriental Insurance Company Limited through its
SDM.DM/Branch Manager, Opposite Narinder Cinema, GT Road,
Jalandhar.
(Insurance Company of car No.PB-09-R-0217).
…...........Respondents.
Amarinder Singh Grewal, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kapurthala, UID No.PB0037
Kuldip Kaur etc. Vs. Harmandeep Singh and another Page No. 2
Claim petition under Section 166 of Motor Vehicle Act, for
grant of compensation on account of death of Ranjit Singh
son of Gurdial Singh, who died on 07.05.2017 in a road
side accident.
Present: Sh. Jatin Anand, Advocate, counsel for the claimants.
Sh. Baljeet Singh Bajwa, Advocate, counsel for the
respondents No. 1 and 2.
Sh. Navdeep Sethi, Advocate, counsel for the respondent
No.3.
AWARD
1) The present claim petition has been filed under Section
166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (herein after referred to as “MV
Act”) for grant of compensation.
2) Filtering the necessary details, the facts which are
requisite to be stated herein are that on 07.05.2017 Ranjit Singh
alongwith his wife, minor daughter and brother had gone to see the
plot situated at Nijjar Road. It was further submitted that Ranjit
Singh had some personal work at Kala Sanghian, whereas Kuldip
Kaur, minor daughter and brother of Ranjit Singh were to stay at the
spot and he (Ranjit Singh) started for going towards Kala Sanghian.
It was further submitted that in the meanwhile, a car bearing
registration No.PB-09-R-0217 driven by respondent No.1 in a high
speed and in a rash and negligent manner and without blowing any
horn came from Jalandhar side and hit the motorcycle of Ranjit
Singh from behind. It was further submitted that as a result of the
Amarinder Singh Grewal, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kapurthala, UID No.PB0037
Kuldip Kaur etc. Vs. Harmandeep Singh and another Page No. 3
accident, Ranjit Singh fell on the road and he received multiple and
serious injuries. Then after making arrangement, Ranjit Singh was
taken to Satyam Hospital, where he remained admitted from
07.05.2017 to 11.06.2017. Since the health of Ranjit Singh was
deteriorating, he was taken to Capitol Hospital but Ranjit Singh died
on 11.06.2017. It was further submitted that the name of the driver
of car bearing registration No.PB-09-R-0217 was disclosed as
Harmandeep Singh. The accident was witnessed by Kuldip Kaur and
brother of Ranjit Singh and others. Postmortem on the body of
deceased was conducted at Civil Hospital, Kapurthala. It was further
submitted that the accident took place due to the rash and negligent
driving of respondent No.1 Harmandeep Singh while driving car
bearing registration No.PB-09-R-0217 in the area of P.S. Sadar,
Kapurthala. Even, FIR No.78 dated 11.06.2017 under section
279/304-A/427 IPC was registered at Police Station Sadar, District
Kapurthala on the basis of statement of Kuldip Kaur, being eye
witness of the accident. It was further submitted that at the time of
death of Ranjit Singh, he was working as a skilled painter and was
earning Rs.15,000/- per month. In the end, it was submitted that
claimants, who are widow, minor daughter and mother of deceased
Ranjit Singh be granted compensation to the tune of Rs.35 lacs.
3) Notice of the claim petition was issued to the
respondents. Respondents No.1 and 2 by way of their written
statement have taken preliminary objections that the claim petition is
Amarinder Singh Grewal, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kapurthala, UID No.PB0037
Kuldip Kaur etc. Vs. Harmandeep Singh and another Page No. 4
not maintainable in the present form as earlier the claimants had filed
the same petition in which no evidence was led by the parties and
lateron, it was withdrawn by the claimants without reserving any
rights from the Lok Adalat vide order dated 14.12.2019 passed by
Sh. Raman Kumar, the then Presiding Officer, National Lok Adalat,
Kapurthala; claimants have got no locus standi and cause of action to
file the present claim petition; claimants are estopped by their own
act and conduct, omission and commission to file the present petition
and the claimants have not come to the court with clean hands and
have suppressed the material facts from the court.
4) On merits, it was submitted that the deceased Ranjit
Singh was not doing any work at all and was unemployed. A false
case has been registered against the respondent No.1, in which the
respondent No.1 was acquitted by the court of Ms. Jasbir Kaur,
Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kapurthala vide judgment
dated 29.11.2019. Rest of the allegations of claimants on merit were
denied by respondents No.1 and 2. In the end, a prayer for dismissal
of claim petition was made.
5) Respondent No.3/Insurance Company by way of its
written statement took preliminary objections that the claim petition
is not maintainable; claimants have got no cause of action to file the
present claim petition; this Tribunal has got no jurisdiction to
entertain the present petition as earlier claim petition bearing CNR
No.PBKP01-003498-2017 has already been decided in National Lok
Amarinder Singh Grewal, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kapurthala, UID No.PB0037
Kuldip Kaur etc. Vs. Harmandeep Singh and another Page No. 5
Adalat on 14.12.2019; claimants have not come to the court with
clean hands and have suppressed the material facts from the court;
claim petition is bad for mis-joinder and non-joinder of necessary
parties; the alleged vehicle in question was not insured at the time of
alleged accident; driver of the car bearing registration No.PB-09-R-
0217 was not having any valid and effective driving licence and the
claim-petition has been filed in collusion between the claimants and
the respondents No.1 and 2. After denying all the contents of the
claim petition on merits, the respondent No.3 prayed for the
dismissal of claim petition was made.
6) On pleadings of the parties, following issues were
framed:-
1) Whether Ranjit Singh had died in a Motor
Vehicle Accident which took place on
07.05.2017 with car bearing registration No.PB-
09-R-0217, so driven by respondent No.1
Harmandeep Singh in a rash and negligent
manner?OPA
2) Whether the claimants are entitled to the
compensation? If so to what amount and from
whom?OPA
3) Whether the present claim petition is not
maintainable? OPR-1, 2 & 3
4) Whether the claimants have no cause of action
to file the present petition? OPR-1, 2 & 3
5) Whether the claimants have come to this court
with clean hands? OPR-1, 2
6) Whether the claimants are estopped by their
Amarinder Singh Grewal, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kapurthala, UID No.PB0037
Kuldip Kaur etc. Vs. Harmandeep Singh and another Page No. 6
own act and conduct, omission and commission
to file the present petition ?OPR- 1, 2
7) Whether the claim petition is bad for mis-
joinder and non-joinder of the necessary parties?
OPR-3
8) Whether respondent No.1 Harmandeep Singh
was not holding a valid and effective driving
license at the time of the accident? OPR-3
9) Relief.
CLAIMANTS EVIDENCE:
7) In order to prove the case of claimants, learned Counsel
for the claimants got examined claimant No.1 Kuldip Kaur widow of
deceased Ranjit Singh as CW1, Deepak Arora as CW2 and then
closed the evidence.
RESPONDENTS EVIDENCE
8) On the other hand, learned counsel for respondents No.1
and 2 closed the evidence after tendering into evidence copy of
Insurance Policy as Ex.PX, whereas learned counsel for the
respondent No.3 also closed the evidence after tendering into
evidence copy of order dated 14.12.2019 as Ex.RA.
9) This Tribunal has heard Sh. Jatin Anand, Advocate
learned Counsel for the claimants, Sh. Baljeet Singh Bajwa,
Advocate, counsel for the respondents No.1 and 2, Sh. Raman
Kumar, Advocate, learned Counsel for respondent no.3, and have
gone through the records carefully and proceed on to return my issue
wise findings as under:-
Amarinder Singh Grewal, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kapurthala, UID No.PB0037
Kuldip Kaur etc. Vs. Harmandeep Singh and another Page No. 7
ARGUMENTS & DISCUSSION
ISSUES No.1 to 8
10) All these issues are taken up together being interlinked
and interconnected and in order to avoid repetition in discussion.
The onus to prove issues no.1 and 2 was upon claimants, whereas
onus to prove rest of the issues was upon respondents.
11) To establish the fact that Ranjit Singh died in a motor
vehicular accident caused by respondent no.1 while driving vehicle
bearing registration No.PB-09-R-0217, CW1 Kuldip Kaur widow of
the deceased through her affidavit Ex.CW1/A, has reiterated entirely
the same version regarding the manner in which the accident took
place, as stated by the claimants in their claim petition. CW1
Kuldip Kaur being author of the FIR no.78 dated 11.06.2017 proved
the same as Ex.C1. This witness was cross examined at length on
behalf of counsel for respondents but her testimony could not be
shattered and she remained firm on her stand.
12) CW2 Deepak Arora, Office Assistant, Satyam Hospital,
Jalandhar brought the summoned record of deceased Ranjit Singh.
As per record, Ranjit Singh was admitted in their hospital on
08.05.2017 and he (Ranjit Singh) died on 11.06.2017. This witness
proved the bills Ex.C4 to Ex.C60.
13) On the other hand, respondents no.1and 2 being driver
and owner of the offending vehicle have not stepped into the witness
box to depose as per the defence taken in their written statement and
Amarinder Singh Grewal, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kapurthala, UID No.PB0037
Kuldip Kaur etc. Vs. Harmandeep Singh and another Page No. 8
in this manner left the battle ground open for the claimants and thus
also exposed themselves for adverse inference being drawn against
him in terms of Section 114 (g) of the Indian Evidence Act in view of
long string of judicial precedents on the topic. As discussed above,
respondent no.1 Harmandeep Singh was the best person to depose
about the manner in which the accident took place, if he was
actually not responsible for the accident, but he has not dared to
take the witness box, seemingly to avoid the test of cross
examination at the hands of counsel for the opposite party.
Moreover, this Tribunal is of the view that CW1 Kuldip Kaur had no
sort of enmity with respondent no.1 so as to implicate him in a false
case. Rather this Tribunal is of the view that in case respondent no.1
had felt that he was falsely implicated in this case, he was at liberty
to have moved the Higher Authorities regarding his false implication
but respondent no.1 never did so. Thus in the given circumstances, it
has to be taken that Ranjit Singh died in a motor vehicular accident
caused by respondent no.1 Harmandeep Singh due to his rash and
negligent driving of the offending car bearing registration No.PB-09-
R-0217.
14) Record reveals that in the written statement so filed by
respondents No.1 and 2, they had submitted that earlier the claimants
had filed the claim petition but the same was withdrawn by them in
the National Lok Adalat on 14.12.2019. To support the above
submissions, learned counsel for the respondents No.1 and 2 had
Amarinder Singh Grewal, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kapurthala, UID No.PB0037
Kuldip Kaur etc. Vs. Harmandeep Singh and another Page No. 9
tendered the copy of order dated 14.12.2019 Ex.R2 before this
Tribunal which shows that earlier the present claimants had filed the
claim petition No.50 dated 04.08.2017 and the matter was taken up
before the National Lok Adalaton 14.12.2019 and then in view of
the statement suffered by learned counsel for the claimants, the claim
petition was dismissed as withdrawn. So once the matter was already
withdrawn before the National Lok Adalat and the claimants never
reserved any right for filing the fresh claim petition, as such, this
Tribunal feels that the claim petition in the given circumstances is not
maintainable nor the claimants had submitted in the claim petition
that any fraud was played upon them nor they have disclosed the fact
in the claim petition regarding the withdrawl of the earlier claim
petition.
15) For all that has been discussed herein above, all the
issues are decided against the claimants and in faovur of the
respondents.
ISSUE NO.9 (RELIEF)
16) As a consequence of my findings returned here in above,
the present claim petition fails and is hereby ordered to be dismissed.
Memo of costs be prepared. File be consigned to the Record Room
after due compilation.
Pronounced in the open Court (Amarinder Singh Grewal)
Dt.23.11.2023 Motor Accident Claims Tribunal
(Arun) Kapurthala (UID No.PB0037)
Amarinder Singh Grewal, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kapurthala, UID No.PB0037
Kuldip Kaur etc. Vs. Harmandeep Singh and another Page No. 10
Kuldip Kaur Vs. Harmandeep Singh etc.
CNR No.PBKP010002742021
MACP No.07/2021
Present: Sh. Jatin Anand, Advocate, counsel for the claimants.
Sh. Baljeet Singh Bajwa, Advocate, counsel for the
respondents No. 1 and 2.
Sh. Navdeep Sethi, Advocate, counsel for the respondent
No.3.
Arguments heard. Vide my separate detailed award of
today, this claim petition stands dismissed. Memo of costs be
prepared. File be consigned to the record room.
Pronounced in the open Court (Amarinder Singh Grewal)
Dt.23.11.2023 Motor Accident Claims Tribunal
(Arun) Kapurthala (UID No.PB0037)
ARUN SUBGOTRA
"I attest tothe accuracy and authenticity
of this document."
2023.11.24 16:15:57 +0530
Amarinder Singh Grewal, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kapurthala, UID No.PB0037
