Sri Deepak Kumar Agarwal,learned counsel for the appellant while assailing the judgement and award dated 29.05.2024 passed in Motor Accident Claim Petition No.86 of 2018(Shrikrishna versus Rajiv & Others) submits that the accident from the vehicle No.U.P. 30 T/2025 insured by the appellant has not been proved because the F.I.R. in regard to the accident on 02.12.2013 was lodged by the son of the respondent after about 8 months disclosing therein that after the accident,his father was taken to the hospital by the people present on the spot and he was called on phone, then he reached with his family members to the hospital, whereas in the cross examination, he admitted that the father was taken to the hospital by him who had come on his call and he also could not see the number of the vehicle. He further submits that the claim petition was filed claiming compensation from both the vehicles i.e Tata Magic No.U.P. 30-T/6676, in which the respondent was going and the offending vehicle No.U.P. 30-T/2025 but the tribunal has awarded the compensation against the vehicle insured by the appellant only on the ground that no claim has been made from the other vehicle. He further challenging the quantum of compensation awarded by the tribunal submits that the tribunal without any evidence has awarded the total compensation for three years 9 months on account of non functioning without any evidence and thereafter 25%, which could not have been done.
