[2025:RJ-JP:47598] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2294/2020 Hdfc Ergo General Insurance Company Ltd., D-54, Siddhi Vinayak Ashok Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur, Having Its Local Office At Office No. 2, Third Floor, C-99, Singhvi Upasana Tower, Shubhash Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur Through Its Constituted Attorney (Insurance Company Of Truck No. Hr-38-S-7963). ----Petitioner/Non-Claimant Versus 1. Smt. Champa Devi Meena W/o Charan Lal Meena, Aged About 46 Years, 2. Charan Lal Meena S/o Kanhiya Lal Meena, Aged About 52 Years, Both R/o Mehtab Singh Ka Nohra, Jain Aushdhalaya, Prem Nagar, Alwar. ---Respondents/Claimants 3. Sahun S/o Shri Gafoor, R/o Village And Post Achwari, Tehsil Firozpur Jhirka, District Nuh Mewat (Haryana) (Driver Of Truck No. HR-38-S-7963) 4. M/s Chetak Logistic Ltd., A-13, Sector 11, Mathura Road Opposite Bata Turn, Faridabad (Haryana) Second Address- Village Shikohpur National Highway-8, Nar Apnu Ghar Manesar, District Gurgaon, Haryana (Owner Of Truck No. HR-38-S-7963) 5. Babu Lal Meena S/o Jagdish Meena, R/o 22, Meenon Ki Dhani Thikariya, Tehsil Sanganer, District Jaipur (Owner Of Car No. RJ-14-Cr-8019) 6. United India Insurance Company Ltd., Through Senior Divisional Manager, Divisional Office, Tonk Road, Jaipur (Insurance Company Of Car No. RJ-14-Cr-8019) ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Virendra Agrawal For Respondent(s) : Mr. Ram Singh Rathore HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND SHARMA Order 25/11/2025 [2025:RJ-JP:47598] (2 of 2) [CW-2294/2020] 1. This petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the orders dated 25.09.2020 & 20.01.2019 passed by Court of, Motor Accident Claim Tribunal No.2, Jaipur Metropolitan, Jaipur whereby, the application for examining one witness Mr. Sahun- respondent No.3 has been rejected and the matter was placed for final hearing. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that witness- Sahun is driver of the vehicle and his testimony is necessary for proper adjudication of the dispute involved in the claim petition before the learned Tribunal. 3. The request made by learned counsel for the petitioner was not opposed by learned counsel for the respondents. 4. In view of above, where the petition is not opposed, same is disposed of with direction to learned Tribunal to ensure presence of witness-Sahun and to record his statements. For the purpose of securing appearance, necessary directions can also be given by the learned Tribunal. 5. Impugned orders dated 25.09.2019 & 20.01.2020 are accordingly set-aside and the petition is disposed of with above direction. (ANAND SHARMA),J NEERU/27