HEMANT CHOPRA Vs. SUBHASH CHOPRA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Vide this common judgment, I intend to dispose of six appeals comprising of FAO No. 4368 of 2014 titled as Hemant Chopra vs Subhash Chopra ; FAO No. 4481 of 2014 titled as Meenakshi Chopra vs Subhash Chopra ; FAO No. 4906 of 2014 titled as Meenakshi Chopra vs Subhash Chopra and FAO No. 5824 of 2014 titled as National Insurance Company Ltd. versus Meenakshi Chopra and others ; FAO No. 5825 of 2014 titled as National Insurance Company Ltd. versus Meenakshi Chopra and others and FAO No. 5826 of 2014 titled as National Insurance Company Ltd. versus Hemant Chopra and others as all these appeals have arisen out of one accident.

(2.) Briefly stated Hemant Chopra filed MACT Petition No.968 of 2013 claiming compensation on account of death of his mother Madhu Chopra in a motor vehicular accident. Meenakshi Chopra and Hemant Chopra also filed claim petition No.966 of 2013 under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act claiming compensation on account of death of Ms Kashish Chopra child of Meenakshi Chopra in a motor vehicular accident. Meenakshi Chopra also filed another claim petition No.967 of 2013 claiming compensation on account of injuries sustained by her in a motor vehicular accident. Although the above noted three claim petitions were preferred separately but all these claim petitions relate to one accident occurred on 6.6.2011. The case of the claimant is that at about 6.00a.m., Ms Kashish Chopra minor along with others were travelling on 6.6.2011 in a car bearing registration No.HR-03J-1395 driven by Subhash Chopra in a rash and negligent manner. It is alleged that said car over turned due to burst of left front tyre and could not be controlled by respondent No.1 due to high speed by Subhash Chopra. The said car has caused fracture in the spinal cord and fracture right clavicle and other serious injuries.

(3.) Respondent No.1 filed written statement admitting the factum of accident but has pleaded that he was holding a valid driving licence. Registration certificate and Insurance policy of the car were placed on the file. Denying other averments, respondent prayed for dismissal of the claim petitions.