NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD Vs. LOKESH VERMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The award of compensation dated 31.05.2019 passed by the Ld. MACT in MACP No. 81/2016 is impugned on the ground that the injured himself has stated that his motorcycle had been hit from behind by a tempo. Therefore, the impugned order has erred in awarding compensation apropos the same accident having been caused by the insured Santro Car bearing Registration No. DL7CE6876. Mr. Rawat, the learned counsel for the appellant, submits that the best eyewitness is the injured himself who had stated that he saw the tempo which hit their vehicle from behind, his own testimony would be of utmost importance and should not be lightly dealt with or discarded. He, thus, submits that the injured motorcyclist has improved upon his first testimony which may have led to the confusion of whether the said motor- vehicular accident was caused by a tempo or the insured car.

(2.) The facts are that on 10.07.2015 at about 9:15 a.m., the claimant was riding his motorcycle on which his wife was sitting as pillion rider. They were hit by a motor vehicle from the rear side which resulted in them being flung off from the motorcycle. The wife suffered fatal injuries and later succumbed to the injuries in a hospital. The motorcyclist/husband received injuries but has survived.

(3.) Claimant had stated that after being flung from the motorcycle, he first looked for his wife and then he saw a tempo going by from the side. So according to him, it was the tempo that had hit them from the rear side with great force. This issue has been dealt with in the impugned order as under:-