- (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. 2nd 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 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.;