AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
R.K.Gauba, J
Avtar Singh, 46 years old, suffered injuries at about 9:00 AM. on 03.01.2010 while travelling on three wheeler scooter bearing registration no. DL
1RG 8483 (TSR) driven by fourth respondent. He died during the course of treatment on 24.01.2010. His wife and three other members of the family
dependent on him, including first to third respondents (collectively, the claimants), instituted accident claim case (Petition no. 229/2010) on 09.02.2010
seeking compensation under Sections 166 and 140 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 on the averments that the accident had occurred due to negligence on
the part of the said TSR driver. The TSR was admittedly insured against third party risk for the period in question, with the appellant. The claim case
was decided on the basis of inquiry held. The tribunal, by judgment dated 29.09.2011, returned a finding that the claimants had established that the
death had occurred due to injuries suffered in the said accident. It awarded compensation in favour of claimants, placing the liability at the door of the
insurer.
The appeal was filed questioning the finding on the issue of connection between the injuries suffered in the accident and the death.
It was admitted and put in the list of ‘regulars’ by order dated 03.02.2017. When it is called out, there is no appearance on behalf of the
appellant and the respondents.
The tribunal’s record has been perused. It is found that the claimants had proved the sequence of events leading to the occurrence through the
testimony of Jogender Singh (PW-2), an eye witness, bringing home the negligence on the part of the TSR driver. The evidence has also shown that
though the victim was discharged on 14.01.2010, he died due to injuries on 24.01.2010. The absence of post-mortem examination, in the opinion of this
Court, cannot detract from the fact that there is a close nexus between the injuries suffered in the accident and the event of death.
Thus, the appeal is found devoid of substance and is dismissed.
By order dated 08.02.2012, the insurance company had been directed to deposit the entire awarded amount with upto date interest with Registrar
General of this Court within the period specified and the same was kept in interest bearing fixed deposit account. By order dated 09.01.2013, 50% of
the awarded amount was permitted to be released to the claimants. The balance shall now be released to the claimants in terms of the impugned
judgment.
Since the appellant has failed to appear at the hearing, the statutory amount is forfeited as costs to be made over by the registry to Delhi High Court
Legal Services Committee.