Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:41515 Court No. - 17 Case :- FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER No. - 289 of 2025 Appellant :- Icici Lombard General Insurance Company Ltd. Thru. Chief Manager Lko. Respondent :- Geeta Singh And 5 Others Counsel for Appellant :- Anchal Mishra Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J. 1. Vakalatnama filed by Sri Prateek Singh, Advocate and Sri Siddhant Mani Tripathi, Advocate on behalf of respondent no.1 is taken on record. 2. Heard Sri Anchal Mishra, learned counsel for the appellant, Sri Siddhant Mani Tripathi, learned counsel for the respondent. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that learned court below committed error in considering the facts of the case and passed the impugned order, in which, seven issues were framed and issue no.1 was whether the accident had taken place on the ground that driver of the vehicle in question took emergency brake, as a result, vehicle of the deceased hit from the back side, received fatal injuries and later on, he died. He further submits that the fact related to the negligent driving of the deceased was not considered by the learned court below. He also submits that it was obligatory on the part of the driver of the vehicle, which was coming behind the vehicle in question that, in case, brake was required, he must take a brake, however, in the present case, driver was negligent but the learned court below decided this issue wrongly, therefore, indulgence of this Court is necessary. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent no.1 & 2 vehemently oppose the prayer of the appellant and submits that there is no illegality in the order passed by the learned court below. He also submits that the eye witness, Amit Saxena categorically stated before the court below that driver of the vehicle in question, i.e., U.P.32 P.N.6663 was driving in the most casual manner and also used emergency brake, opened the window for spitting pan masala, as a result, the vehicle of the deceased coming behind the said vehicle, hit from the back side, in which, and driver of the vehicle No. U.P.32 D.P.3673 received fatal injuries. He also submits that deceased was having valid driving license and his vehicle was also insured, therefore, learned court below has rightly appreciated the evidence and there is no illegality in the award. 5. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the appellant, learned counsel for the respondent, going through the contents of the award, it is evident that court below properly appreciated the statement given by the independent eye witness, namely, Amit Saxena and rightly observed that driver of the vehicle in question took emergency brake and opened the window for spitting pan masala, as a result, vehicle of the deceased clashed and he received injuries. In such circumstances, this Court is of the view that learned court below has rightly appreciated the evidence placed before it, therefore, there is no illegality in the impugned award, accordingly, the present appeal is hereby dismissed. Order Date :- 21.7.2025 GauraV/- Digitally signed by :- GAURAV PAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- GAURAV PAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench