$~6 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + MAC.APP. 650/2025 & CM APPL. 62942/2025 HDFC ERGO GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD .....Appellant Through: Mr. Sameer Nandwani, Adv. Ms.

Niyati, Advocate.

versus SANJAY & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Umesh Kumar, Mr. Rakesh Kumar and Ms. Sakshi Mishra, Advocates for R-1.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANISH DAYAL

O R D E R

% 20.02.2026

1. This appeal has been filed assailing award dated 11^th March 2025 passed by Motor Vehicles Claims Tribunal (South-East), Saket Courts, New Delhi (hereinafter ‘Tribunal’) in MACT No.290/2022 awarding compensation to the tune of Rs.50,75,016/-, along with interest @ 9 % per annum from the date of filing of petition till realization.

2. The accident occurred on 4^th February 2021 at about 4:00 am when respondent no.1/injured was proceeding to Okhla Mandi on a horse cart to purchase vegetables. When he reached near Outer Ring Road, the offending vehicle hit the said horse cart, causing injuries to respondent no.1/injured. Subsequently, he was removed by police to AIIMS Trauma Centre. FIR No.36/2021 was registered at PS Chitranjan Park. The offending vehicle was insured with appellant/Insurance Company.

3. Issue notice.

4. Mr. Umesh Kumar, Counsel for respondent no.1 accepts notice.

5. Mr. Sameer Nandwani, Advocate for appellant/Insurance Company argues that no evidence was produced by claimants before the Tribunal and the same was recorded by the Tribunal in order dated 1^st March 2025.

6. Per contra, Counsel for claimant stated that Insurance Company also did not lead evidence.

7. Mr. Sameer Nandwani, Advocate clarifies that evidence was not led by Insurance Company qua the Detailed Accident Report (‘DAR’) since the parties did not dispute the findings of DAR and a joint request was made. A legal offer had also been filed that the matter may be decided and disposed of based on material available on record.

8. Mr. Sameer Nandwani, Advocate states that, at that stage, only DAR was on record and no evidence was filed by claimants, therefore, claimants will have to either sink or sail with it. Subsequently, on directions of the Tribunal, Disability Certificate was requisitioned, which was provided on 2^nd September 2023, stating that there was 90% permanent disability with respect to both lower limbs.

9. He further states that aside from other aspects, where compensation could not have been granted without evidence being led, particularly in respect of certain pecuniary losses, Disability Certificate would have to be proved and an opportunity would have to be granted to cross examine the doctor(s) from the Medical Board.

10. Considering this grievance of appellant/Insurance Company, matter can be resolved by allowing evidence to be led in respect of disability certificate.

11. Accordingly, matter be placed before Joint Registrar (Judicial) on 12^th March 2026 at or about 3 p.m. for recording testimony of any one of the doctors, from Pt. Madan Mohan Malaviya Hospital, who were a part of the Medical Board and had signed the Disability Certificate.

12. Claimant shall take steps to requisition the doctor, as aforesaid, who can testify with respect to Disability Certificate with right of cross examination granted to appellant/Insurance Company.

13. Appellant/Insurance Company will deposit entire compensation amount along with up-to-date interest before the Tribunal and 50% of same shall be released in favour of claimants.

14. Subject to deposit of entire compensation amount by Appellant/Insurance Company, there shall be stay of operation of the impugned award till the next date of hearing.

15. Trial Court Record be also requisitioned and placed on record. Digital copy of the same be supplied to the counsels for the parties, if so requested.

16. Counsels for contesting parties will file their respective note of arguments not exceeding three pages, synopsizing their contentions along with list of citations, which they wish to rely upon, cross-referencing PDF pages of the Court File. The sa