JAI DEV Vs. LABH SINGH AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard.

(2.) Though respondent No. 1, i.e. the driver of the 'offending vehicle', has not been served of the notice in this appeal, respondents No. 2 and 3 stand duly served. In view of the fact that the contesting respondent is actually the Insurance Company (respondent No. 3), it is not considered necessary to serve respondent No. 1, as submitted by learned counsel for the appellant.

(3.) The facts leading up to the filing of the claim petition before the Tribunal, are that the appellant was riding on motor cycle No. HR -02 -P -5427, on 06.08.2011, near Vishwakarma Chowk, Yamuna Nagar. When, at about 11:00 p.m., he took a turn towards the Radaur Road, a truck bearing registration No. HR -58 -A -2234 (hereinafter referred to as 'offending vehicle'), stated to be driven at a high speed, in a rash and negligent manner, came from behind and struck against the motor cycle. The appellant is stated to have fallen down and sustained multiple injuries on various part of his body and his motor cycle was also extensively damaged.