1

Court No. - 1

Case :- FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER DEFECTIVE No. - 1270

of 2019

Appellant :- H.D.F.C. Ergo General Insurance Company Ltd

Respondent :- Sarthak Jain And 02 Others

Counsel for Appellant :- Sushil Kumar Mehrotra

Counsel for Respondent :- Vidya Kant Shukla

Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J.

Hon'ble Ajit Kumar,J.

Order on Delay Condonation Application No.1 of 2019.

Heard Sri Sushil Kumar Mehrotra, learned counsel for the

appellant and Sri Vidya Kant Shukla, learned Counsel appearing

for the Claimant-respondent no.1.

In view of the office report dated 18.2.2020, service of notice

upon respondent nos.2 and 3 is deemed sufficient.

The cause shown for delay is sufficient. The delay in filing

the First Appeal From Order is, accordingly, condoned.

(Ajit Kumar, J.) (Ramesh Sinha, J.)

Order Date :- 18.2.2020

Gaurav

2

AFR

.

Court No. - 1

Case :- FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER DEFECTIVE No. - 1270

of 2019

Appellant :- H.D.F.C. Ergo General Insurance Company Ltd

Respondent :- Sarthak Jain And 02 Others

Counsel for Appellant :- Sushil Kumar Mehrotra

Counsel for Respondent :- Vidya Kant Shukla

Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J.

Hon'ble Ajit Kumar,J.

1. Heard Sri Sushil Kumar Mehrotra, learned counsel for the

appellant and Sri Vidya Kant Shukla, learned Counsel for the

Claimant-respondent no.1.

2. This First Appeal From order is directed against the award dated

6.7.2019 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Additional

District Judge, Court No.13, Meerut allowing the claim petition of

the claimant-respondent no.1, bearing number 524 of 2020 for

compensation of Rs.66,39,947/-.

3. Briefly stated facts of the case are that the injured Sarthak Jain

met with an accident on 2.5.2017 with a truck while he was driver

upon a motorcycle of his friend Pranay Bist and the injured was

moving in a right direction to the left of the road whereas truck

driver was driving the truck rashly and hit the motorcycle. The

truck driver immediately fled the spot. The injured fainted and was

immediately taken to the hospital and went under treatment. The

impact of the injury upon the injured was of the nature and decree

that he suffered disability to the extent of 100% and motor system

disability to the extent of 75%. The speech disability was also

found to be too severe to the extent of 100% and 100% is the post

head injury resulting in fits. Motor system disability is 75%. Bladder

disability is 100%. So in the language of the medical practitioner,

the highest score of disability is 100%. It has come to be

established on record that the injured at the time of accident was

21 years of age and was a student of B.Tec. 2^nd year. The tribunal

framed as many as seven issues for determination which are

quoted as under:-

A. Whether the driver of the truck No.U.P-17-AT-1888 was

3

driving the truck rashly and negligently and hit the

motorcycle of the injured as a result of such driving on

2.5.2017.

B. Whether the driver of the motorcycle was having valid

driving licence.

C. Whether the truck driver was having valid licence.

D. Whether the truck U.P.17-AT-1888 was duly ensured with

HDFC Ergo General Insurance Company Ltd.

E. Whether it is a case of contributory negligence of the two

vehicle drivers and if so what would be the effect.

F. Whether the Claim Petition was liable to be dismissed for

non-joinder of necessary parties.

G. Whether the claimant is entitled for any compensation

and if yes to what amount.

4. Both the Insurance Company as well as the claimant led their

evidence in the matter. The Tribunal discussed and decided issue

no.1 and 5 together as they are related to each other.

5. Discussing the oral as well as documentary evidence led in

regard to the above two issues. The Claims Tribunal recorded a

categorical finding to the effect that soon after the accident, First

Information Report (for short FIR) was lodged against the driver of

the truck namely Shadab under Section 279, 337, 338 and 427 of

Ind