Damodar Yadav vs Vikash Jain & Another
2021 Latest Caselaw 2100 Jhar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
            (Civil Miscellaneous Appellate Jurisdiction)
                   M.A. No. 164 of 2018
                          ........

Damodar Yadav                           .... ..... Appellant
                              Versus
Vikash Jain & Another                   .... ..... Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH PRASAD DEO (Through : Video Conferencing) ............

For the Appellant : Mr. Lukesh Kumar, Advocate. For the Respondent No. 2 : Mr. Manish Kumar, Advocate.

........

06/29.06.2021.

Learned counsel for the appellant, Mr. Lukesh Kumar has submitted that in terms of order dated 05.04.2021, copy has been served upon learned counsel for the Insurance Company, Mr. Manish Kumar.

Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the Injured Damodar Yadav has preferred this appeal against the judgment dated 16.11.2017 passed by learned District Judge-IX-cum-M.A.C.T., Dhanbad in Title (M.V.) Suit No. 234/2010, whereby the claim application of the applicant has been dismissed considering that the claimant / applicant himself responsible for accident and as such, claim under Section 163 (A) of the Motor Vehicles Act on structured formula basis is not at all maintainable and the claim made by the claimant / applicant is liable to be dismissed.

Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that admittedly Damodar Yadav was driver of the truck bearing registration no. WB- 23B-5588 which dashed a standing trailor bearing registration no. NL-01A-9384 on 03.01.2009 (mid-night) at about 3:00 A.M. within Topchanchi P.S., because of some technical difficulties in the truck as submitted by P.W.-1 Damodar Yadav in his evidence before the learned Tribunal, as such, the accident was beyond his control, because of which, he suffered damage of both of his legs, knee and chest, and he remained under treatment for quite a long time, but the learned Tribunal has rejected the claim application.

Learned counsel for the appellant has further submitted that there is delay of 21 days in preferring the appeal against the impugned judgment and for condonation of same, I.A. No. 845/2020 has been preferred.

Learned counsel for the Insurance Company, Mr. Manish Kumar has submitted that he has no objection, if the delay in filing the appeal is condoned.

Considering the aforesaid submissions, the delay in filing the appeal is hereby condoned and I.A. No. 845/2020 is hereby allowed.

However, office is directed to place this appeal on 05.07.2021 for final disposal as prayed by learned counsel for the parties.

(Kailash Prasad Deo, J.) Sunil/-