RAM GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD Vs. KRISHAN KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CM NO. 4587 -CII OF 2015

(2.) BRIEFLY stated, Krishan Kumar -claimant (now respondent No.1) filed claim petition claiming compensation on account of injuries suffered by him in a motor vehicular accident. It is alleged that on 15.03.2012 at about 1:00 PM, petitioner/claimant was going from Dadri to Jhajjar on his motorcycle bearing registration No. HR -19F -6177. When he reached near Haryana Hotel Imlota, one dumper bearing registration No. HR -57 -2467 came from behind and struck against the pick up dala, as a result of which, the pick up dala skid towards road side and the truck struck against the motorcycle of the claimant. Due to this, the claimant suffered injuries on his left leg, right hand and right leg. The dumper after striking the pick up dala also hit another motorcycle upon which two persons were travelling. The claimant was first taken to General Hospital, Charkhi Dadri, but due to his serious condition, he was referred to General Hospital, Bhiwani. For better treatment, the claimant was taken to Ranvir Hospital,. Bhiwani, where he remained admitted from 15.03.2012 to 22.03.2012. It is further pleaded that a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/ - was spent on his treatment. It is further pleaded that the claimant became permanently disabled due to the injuries sustained by him in the accident. Therefore, a sum of Rs. 20,00,000/ - has been claimed as compensation.

(3.) NOTICE of the claim petition was given to respondents. Respondents No.1 and 2 filed joint written statement denying all the allegations levelled in the claim petition. It was further pleaded that no alleged accident had taken place due to rash and negligent driving of respondent No.1. It was further pleaded that false and frivolous FIR was got lodged against respondent No.1 by the petitioner in collusion with the police. Respondents No. 4 and 5 filed joint written statement taking preliminary objections that no accident took place with the alleged vehicle. It was further pleaded that respondent No.4 was driving his vehicle at a moderate speed and with full care and caution. It was further alleged that the respondents have been falsely implicated in the case in order to get compensation. Respondents No.3 and 6 filed their joint written statement taking preliminary objections that no information regarding alleged accident was given to them. It was further pleaded that respondents No.1 and 4 were not holding valid and effective driving license at the time of accident. The other averments were denied.