UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD vs SHARMILA AND ORS

SARITA RANI 2026.05.13 18:19 I attest to the accuracy of this document/order FAO No.2416 of 2026 (O&M) 2026:PHHC:075304 4. I have heard learned counsel for the appellant and have gone through the paper-book as well as the impugned award. 5. The submissions raised on behalf of the appellant deserve rejecon. 6. The Tribunal, a!er appreciang both oral as well as documentary evidence available on record, has returned a categorical finding that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of respondent No.1 while driving car bearing registraon No. HR-24Q-0027. 7. A perusal of the record reveals that the claimants examined Krishan Kumar as PW-2, who was an eye-witness to the occurrence as well as the complainant in the FIR. Another eye-witness namely Surender was examined as PW-3. Both these witnesses consistently deposed regarding the manner, in which the accident occurred and specifically a5ributed negligence to the driver of the offending vehicle. The Tribunal has noced that despite detailed cross-examinaon, nothing material could be elicited so as to discredit their tesmonies. 8. The Tribunal also relied upon tesmony of PW-4 Naresh Kumar, the Invesgang Officer, who pro