Delhi High Court
Upsrtc vs Master Luv & Anr. on 22 February, 2021
$~41, 43, 45 to 47
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Judgment delivered on: 22.02.2021
+ MAC.APP.98/2021
UPSRTC ..... Appellant
versus
SMT. SUMAN & ORS. ..... Respondents
+ MAC.APP. 100/2021
UPSRTC ..... Appellant
versus
MASTER LUV & ANR. ..... Respondents
+ MAC.APP. 102/2021
UPSRTC ..... Appellant
versus
SH. KULDEEP KUMAR & ANR. ..... Respondents
+ MAC.APP. 103/2021
UPSRTC ..... Appellant
versus
SH. KULDEEP KUMAR & ANR. ..... Respondents
+ MAC.APP. 104/2021
UPSRTC ..... Appellant
versus
SH. KULDEEP KUMAR & ANR. ..... Respondents
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:KUNAL
MAGGU
Signing Date:24.02.2021 09:33:38 MAC.APP.98/2021 & connected matters Page 1
This file is digitally signed by PS
to HMJ Sanjeev Sachdeva.
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Aly Mirza, Advocate.
For the Respondent: None.
CORAM:-
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA
JUDGMENT
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL)
CM APPL.6959/2021 (exemption)
CM APPL.7014/2021 (exemption)
CM APPL.7046/2021 (exemption)
CM APPL.7147/2021 (exemption)
CM APPL.7150/2021 (exemption)
Exemption is allowed subject to all just exceptions.
CM APPL.6960/2021 IN MAC.APP.98/2021
CM APPL.7015/2021 IN MAC.APP.100/2021
CM APPL.7047/2021 IN MAC.APP.102/2021
CM APPL.7148/2021 IN MAC.APP.103/2021
CM APPL.7151/2021 IN MAC.APP.104/2021
1. The hearing was conducted through video conferencing.
2. Appellant seeks condonation of delay of 23 days. It is noticed
that the subject judgment impugned is dated 26.10.2020. The Supreme
Court in Suo Moto Writ Petition(Civil) No.3/2020 by its order dated
23.03.2020 has extended the period of limitation under the general
and special laws w.e.f. 15th March, 2020. Said order is still in
operation.
3. In view of the above, there is no delay in filing the appeal.
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:KUNAL
MAGGU
Signing Date:24.02.2021 09:33:38 MAC.APP.98/2021 & connected matters Page 2
This file is digitally signed by PS
to HMJ Sanjeev Sachdeva.
4. The applications are accordingly disposed of.
MAC.APP.98/2021 & CM APPL.6958/2021
MAC.APP.100/2021 & CM APPL.7013/2021
MAC.APP.102/2021 & CM APPL.7045/2021
MAC.APP.103/2021 & CM APPL.7146/2021
MAC.APP.104/2021 & CM APPL.7149/2021
1. These appeals arise out of common awards dated 26.02.2020,
whereby the respective claim petitions have been allowed and
compensation awarded.
2. As per the claim petitions, subject accident occurred on
17.06.2015 at about 11.50 PM in front of Bhudbarai Masjid, Meerut,
U.P involving the bus of the Appellant being driven by Vikas Kumar
who is also a respondent in these appeals.
3. The Tribunal based on the evidence has held that Sh. Mohan
Kaushik @ Mohan Lal (deceased) along with Kuldeep Singh
(claimant) injured, Meenakshi (deceased), Luv and other persons were
coming in a car from Haridwar to Narela. At about 11.50 PM when
they reached in front of Bhudbarai Masjid, Meerut, U.P, the offending
bus being driven in a rash and negligent manner at a very high speed
came and hit the car with great force. Due to the impact all the
occupant of the car suffered injuries. Mohan Kaushik @ Mohan Lal,
Meenakshi and Kush a nine year old boy suffered fatal injuries
whereas Kuldeep Kumar and minor Luv suffered grievous injuries.
4. Tribunal has noticed that the Appellants had not disputed the
factum of the accident, however, the dispute was with regard to
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:KUNAL
MAGGU
Signing Date:24.02.2021 09:33:38 MAC.APP.98/2021 & connected matters Page 3
This file is digitally signed by PS
to HMJ Sanjeev Sachdeva.
negligence. It was contended that the driver of the offending vehicle
was not negligent.
5. Tribunal has observed that the driver of the bus was examined
as a witness and during cross examination, he had admitted that he
was not driving the bus in the concerned lane meant for heavy
vehicles. The Tribunal has further held that the testimony of the
injured Kuldeep Singh could not be shaken during the cross
examination and he has successfully withstood the test of cross
examination.
6. The Tribunal accordingly held that the accident occurred on
account of rash and negligent driving by the driver of the offending
bus.
7. Nothing has been pointed out before this Court to contradict the
finding returned by the Tribunal.
8. With regard to the computation, the Tribunal has followed the
dicta laid down by the Supreme Court in 'National Insurance
Company Vs. Pranay Sethi' (2017) 16 SCC 680.
9. Nothing has been pointed out to show that the computation of
the award done by the Tribunal is erroneous or contradictory to the
judgment of the Supreme Court.
10. On perusal of the record as well as the evidence of the parties
placed on record by the appellant, I find no infirmity in the finding
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:KUNAL
MAGGU
Signing Date:24.02.2021 09:33:38 MAC.APP.98/2021 & connected matters Page 4
This file is digitally signed by PS
to HMJ Sanjeev Sachdeva.
returned by the Tribunal as well as the computation of the
compensation awarded.
11. I find no merit in the appeals. The appeals are accordingly
dismissed.
12. Learned counsel for the appellant contends that the matter is
listed before the Tribunal in execution proceedings. He, however,
assures that the appellant shall deposit the awarded amount with the
Tribunal within a period of three weeks from today. On deposit of the
amount, the Tribunal shall disburse the amount as per the scheme of
disbursal provided in the stipulated award.
13. Copy of the Order be uploaded on the High Court website and
be also forwarded to learned counsels through email.
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.
FEBRUARY 22, 2021/rk
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:KUNAL
MAGGU
Signing Date:24.02.2021 09:33:38 MAC.APP.98/2021 & connected matters Page 5
This file is digitally signed by PS
to HMJ Sanjeev Sachdeva.
