RAM KANWAR vs BALRAJ AND ORS. — FAO/5406/2009

Case under No Acts Defined. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 12th May 2026.

Case disposed Next hearing 08-Feb-2010

CNR: PHHC010827622009

Filing Number

FAO/5406/2009

Filing Date

11-Sep-2009

Registration No

FAO/5406/2009

Registration Date

13-Nov-2009

Judge

Mrs. Justice Sudeepti Sharma

Coram

Mrs. Justice Sudeepti Sharma

Bench Type

Single

Category

500.22 - APPL FILED BY CLAIMANT FOR ENHANCE IN DISMIS CASES ( 887 )

Sub-Category

( 944 )

Judicial Branch

CIVIL REVISION BRANCH-I

Decision Date

12-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ALLOWED

Last updated 01-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

No Acts Defined

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.RAM KANWAR

    Adv. SUSHEEL GAUTAM

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.BALRAJ AND ORS.

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 12-May-2026

    Mrs. Justice Sudeepti SharmaView PDF

    Summary: The Punjab & Haryana High Court allowed Ram Kanwar's appeal against the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal's dismissal of his compensation claim arising from a June 2006 tractor-trailer accident. The court found the tribunal's dismissal based on an unsubstantiated collusion allegation legally untenable, noting the FIR registration and police chargesheet against the driver constituted prima facie evidence under the Motor Vehicles Act requiring only preponderance of probabilities. Awarding Rs. 2,50,000 in lump-sum compensation plus 9% annual interest, the court held the insurance company failed to prove collusion and erred in drawing adverse inferences against the claimant. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 30-Mar-2010

    —

    Mr Justice Rakesh Kumar Garg

  4. 26-Mar-2010

    —

    Mr Justice Rakesh Kumar Garg

  5. 08-Feb-2010

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  6. 11-Sep-2009

    Case filed

    Registration No. FAO/5406/2009

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: The Punjab & Haryana High Court allowed Ram Kanwar's appeal against the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal's dismissal of his compensation claim arising from a June 2006 tractor-trailer accident. The court found the tribunal's dismissal based on an unsubstantiated collusion allegation legally untenable, noting the FIR registration and police chargesheet against the driver constituted prima facie evidence under the Motor Vehicles Act requiring only preponderance of probabilities. Awarding Rs. 2,50,000 in lump-sum compensation plus 9% annual interest, the court held the insurance company failed to prove collusion and erred in drawing adverse inferences against the claimant. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case