Delhi District Court
Nihar Ranjan Mohanty vs . Mohd. Hussain & Anr. on 29 May, 2019
1
IN THE COURT OF SH. PARAMJIT SINGH PO : MACT (SOUTHWEST
DISTRICT), DWARKA COURTS: NEW DELHI
MACP No. : 1507/16
Nihar Ranjan Mohanty Vs. Mohd. Hussain & Anr.
CNR No.DLSW010003582012
1 Nihar Ranjan Mohanty
S/o Sh. Sarveshwar Mohanty
R/o N3/17, Mohan Garden,
Uttam Nagar, New Delhi. ... Petitioner
Vs
1. Mohd. Hussain Azad (Owner)
S/o Sh. Deen Mohammad
R/o A3/5 B, Chankaya PlaceI
Pankha Road, Janak Puri
New Delhi
2. Irshad (Driver)
S/o Mohd. Hussain Azad
R/o A3/5 B, Chankaya PlaceI
Pankha Road, Janak Puri
New Delhi ... Respondents
MACP No. : 1508/16
Diwakar Rout (since deceased) through LRs Vs. Mohd. Hussain & Anr.
CNR No.DLSW010003592012
1 Diwakar Rout (since deceased)
through LRs
(a) Manjulata Rout
W/o late Diwakar Rout
(MACP No. 1507/16 & 1508/16) Nihar Ranjan Mohanty Vs. Irshad & Ors. 1/35
2
(b) Shrishti Rout
D/o late Diwakar Rout
(c) Arohi Rout
D/o late Diwakar Rout
All Resident of :
Oupoada, Kajala Bandha,
Kendrapara,
Odisa ... Petitioners
Vs
1. Mohd. Hussain Azad (Owner)
S/o Sh. Deen Mohammad
R/o A3/5 B, Chankaya Place I
Pankha Road, Janak Puri
New Delhi
2. Irshad (Driver)
S/o Mohd. Hussain Azad
R/o A3/5 B, Chankaya PlaceI
Pankha Road, Janak Puri
New Delhi ... Respondents
Date of institution of MACP No. 1507/16 01.11.2012
Date of institution of MACP No.1508/16 01.11.2012
Date on which, judgment have been reserved 02.05.2019
Date of pronouncement of judgment 29.05.2019
JUDGMENT
Vide this common judgment, I shall dispose of two claim petitions bearing MACP No. 1507/16 and MACP No. 1508/16 pertaining the same road traffic accident, which took place on 07.02.2012.
(MACP No. 1507/16 & 1508/16) Nihar Ranjan Mohanty Vs. Irshad & Ors. 2/35 3 The first petition (bearing MACP No. 1507/16) has been filed qua the injuries sustained by petitioner/injuredNihar Ranjan Mohanty in a road traffic accident dated 07.02.2012.
The connected claim petition (bearing MACP No.1508/16) has been filed qua the injuries sustained by petitioner/ injured Diwakar Rout in the same road traffic accident.
2. Brief facts as made out from the abovesaid petitions are that on 07.02.2012 at about 10:00 AM, petitioners Nihar Ranjan Mohanty and Diwakar Rout were coming from their work on a motorcycle bearing no. DL 12SA 1687, which was being driven by Nihar Ranjan Mohanty and when they reached Dabri Dwarka Road, near Madrasi Pul, Sector 1, Dwarka, New Delhi, suddenly the offending vehicle bearing DL 1LK 7210 came at a very high speed, being driven by its driver in rash and negligent manner and hit the motorcycle and as a result of which , petitioners fell down on the road and received multiple injuries on their bodies. It is further stated that after the accident, petitioners/injured were taken to DDU hospital in a PCR van and the case in this regard was registered vide FIR No. 37/12 u/s 279/338 IPC at PS Dabri. It is stated that due to the injuries, petitioner Nihar Ranjan Mohanty remained admitted in the hospital from 07.02.2012 to 23.02.2012 and petitioner Diwakar Rout remained admitted in the hospital from 07.02.2012 to 25.02.2012. It is further stated that petitioners Nihar Ranjan Mohanty and Diwakar Rout were working with Rout Sanitary Sons Pvt. Ltd and were earning Rs.12,000/ pm and Rs.25,000/ pm respectively at the time of accident. It is also stated that respondents were jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation and it has been prayed in petition bearing MACP no. 1507/16 that an award for a sum of Rs.50 lacs alongwith interest @ 18 % pa from the date of filing the present petition till (MACP No. 1507/16 & 1508/16) Nihar Ranjan Mohanty Vs. Irshad & Ors. 3/35 4 realization may be passed in favour of the petitioners and against the respondents. Further, in the petition bearing MACP no.1508/16, it has been prayed that an award for a sum of Rs.1 crore alongwith interest @ 18 % pa from the date of filing the present petition till realization may be passed in favour of the petitioner/injured and against the respondents.
3. WS have been filed on behalf of R1 Mohd. Hussain Azad ( owner ) & R2 Irshad (driver of the offending vehicle) and therein it has been stated that the present petitions were not maintainable as the petitioners have not come to the court with clean hands and have suppressed the true facts from the court. It is further stated that the present petitions were not maintainable as there was no cause of action in favour of the petitioners. It is also stated that amounts claimed by the petitioners were exorbitant and without any proof thereof.
Further, in parawise reply, contents of para 1 to 6 of the petition have been denied for want of knowledge and contents of paras9, 10, 15 to 18, 24 to 27 are stated to be matter of record. Contents of remaining para have been denied on behalf of R1 & R2 and it has been prayed that the present petitions filed on behalf of the petitioners may be dismissed with cost.
4. In the case bearing MACP No.1507/16, on the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed on 07.01.2013 by one of the Ld. Predecessors of this court :
ISSUES :
1. Whether petitioner received injuries in an accident on 07.02.2012 caused by respondent no. 2, while driving maruti van bearing DL 1LK 7210 (LGV) rashly and negligently, owned by respondent no. 1. ? ...OPP (MACP No. 1507/16 & 1508/16) Nihar Ranjan Mohanty Vs. Irshad & Ors. 4/35 5
2. If yes, what is the amount of compensation which the claimant is entitled to receive and from which respondent ? ...OPP
3. Relief.
5. In the case bearing MACP No.1508/16, on the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed on 07.01.2013 by one of the Ld. Predecessors of this court :
ISSUES :
1. Whether petitioner received injuries in an accident on 07.02.2012 caused by respondent no. 2, while driving maruti van bearing DL 1LK 7210 (LGV) rashly and negligently, owned by respondent no. 1. ? ...OPP
2. If yes, what is the amount of compensation which the claimant is entitled to receive and from which respondent ? ...OPP
3. Relief.
6. In the case bearing MACP No.1507/16, petitioner/ injured Nihar Ranjan Mohanty has examined himself as PW1 and he has also examined PW2 Sanatan Raut and PW3 Pyara Singh and thereafter, PE was closed on behalf of the said petitioner.
In the case bearing MACP No.1508/16, petitioner Diwakar Rout has examined himself as PW1 and he has also examined PW2 Sanatan Raut and PW3 Pyara Singh and thereafter, PE was closed on behalf of the said petitioner.
(MACP No. 1507/16 & 1508/16) Nihar Ranjan Mohanty Vs. Irshad & Ors. 5/35 6
7. In RE, respondents have examined RW1 Mohd. Irshad (R2/ driver of offending vehicle) and thereafter RE was closed.
8. I have heard the arguments put forward by Ld. counsels for the petitioners and respondents and have carefully gone through record of the case. I have carefully considered the evidence led by the petitioners in support of their case and RE led on behalf of the respondents. I have also carefully perused written submissions filed on behalf of the petitioners and respondents.
9. It is pertinent to mention here that during the pendency of the cases, the petitioner/injured Diwakar Rout expired and an application u/o 22 rule 3 r/w Section 151 CPC for bringing on record his LRs i.e Smt. Manjulata Rout ( wife), Shrishti Rout ( daughter) and Arohi Rout ( daughter) was moved and the said application was allowed and the above named LRs of the deceased petitioner/injuredDiwakar Rout were substituted on record in place of the said deceased petitioner/injured vide order dated 12.07.2018.
10. The issuewise findings are as under :
11. ISSUE No. 1 in both these cases MACP No. 1507/16 & MACP No. 1508/16 Whether petitioner received injuries in an accident on 07.02.2012 caused by respondent no. 2, while driving maruti van bearing DL 1LK 7210 (LGV) rashly and negligently, owned by respondent no. 1. ? ...OPP The onus to prove the abovesaid issue no. 1 in both these cases bearing (MACP No. 1507/16 & 1508/16) Nihar Ranjan Mohanty Vs. Irshad & Ors. 6/35 7 MACP No. 1507/16 & MACP No. 1508/16 was upon the petitioners therein and in order to discharge the said onus, the petitioners have examined PWNihar Ranjan Mohanti (petitioner/injured in MACP No. 1507/16), who has filed his evidence by way of affidavit (Ex. PW1/A in MACP No. 1507/16), wherein it has been stated that on 07.02.2012 at about 10:00 AM, he and Diwakar Rout were coming from their work on a motorcycle bearing no. DL 12SA 1687, which was being driven by him and when they reached DabriDwarka Road, near Madrasi Pul, Sector 1, Dwarka, New Delhi, suddenly the offending vehicle bearing DL 1LK 7210 came at a very high speed, being driven by its driver in rash and negligent manner and hit the motorcycle and as a result of which, they fell down on the road and received multiple injuries on their bodies. PW Nihar Ranjan Mohanty further deposed that after the accident, they were taken to DDU hospital in a PCR van.
In regard to issue no. 1, petitioners have also examined PWDiwakar Rout (petitioner/injured in MACP No. 1508/16), who has filed his evidence by way of affidavit (Ex. PW1/A in MACP No. 1508/16) and contents of the said affidavit are almost on the similar lines as that of affidavit (Ex. PW1/A in MACP No. 1507/16) of PW Nihar Ranjan Mohanty.
The important fact is that the abovesaid witnesses i.e. PW Nihar Ranjan Mohanty and PW Diwarkar Rout were cross examined by Ld counsel for the respondents, but nothing material has come on record which could assail the credibility or trustworthiness of this witness.
In his cross examination by the Ld. counsel for the respondents, PW Nihar Ranjan Mohanty stated that he had hardly crossed the red light when the accident took place. PW Nihar Ranjan Mohanty denied the suggestion that he was not having any Driving Licence. He further denied the suggestion that he was under
the influence of liquor on the date of accident. PW Nihar Ranjan Mohanty denied the (MACP No. 1507/16 & 1508/16) Nihar Ranjan Mohanty Vs. Irshad & Ors. 7/35 8 suggestion that he had suffered no injury due to the accident. He further denied the suggestion that he was deposing falsely that the offending vehicle was being driven at a fast speed. PW Nihar Ranjan Mohanty also denied the suggestion that since he was under influence of alcohol, he had suffered injuries due to his own negligence, but to claim compensation, he has falsely named respondent nos. 1 & 2.
In his cross examination by the Ld. counsel for the respondents, PW Diwakar Rout stated that they were going from Vasant Kunj to Patel Nagar to buy some material and the accident had taken place at Sector 5 Dwarka. PW Diwakar Rout denied the suggestion that he was not wearing the helmet. He further denied the suggestion that Nihar Ranjan Mohanty was under the influence of alcohol. PW Diwakar Rout denied the suggestion that he do not know the contents of his affidavit. In these circumstances, nothing material has come on record which could shake the credibility of these witnesses qua their deposition regarding the manner in which the accident was caused in this case.
Further, in regard to Issue no.1, respondents have also examined RW1 Irshad (R2/driver of offending vehicle bearing no. DL 1LK 7210) and he has filed his evidence by way of affidavit (Ex. RW1/A) and therein, it has been stated that he was respondent no. 2 and well conversant with the fact and circumstances of the present case. He further stated that petitioner was driving the motorcycle bearing DL 12SA 1687 in drunken condition as a result of which, the petitioner alongwith the motorcycle and pillion rider fell down on the road and sustained injuries. RW1 also stated that no accident of the petitioners had taken place with vehicle bearing no. DL 1LK 7210, driven by him on 07.02.2012, however the testimony of this witness i.e. RW1 is not of much use to the respondents in the instant case as the perusal of the record reveals that RW1 Irshad has been chargesheeted as an accused in the instant case bearing FIR No. 37/12 u/s 279/338 IPC PS : Dabri and he has been facing (MACP No. 1507/16 & 1508/16) Nihar Ranjan Mohanty Vs. Irshad & Ors. 8/35 9 criminal trial for the said offences before the court concerned.
Hence, in view of the above discussion & observations and having regard to the fact and circumstances of the present case, it is evident that petitioners/ injured Nihar Ranjan Mohanty and Diwakar Rout sustained injuries in a motor vehicle accident due to rash and negligent driving of offending vehicle no. DL 1LK 7210, which was being driven by R2 Irshad and owned by R1 Mohd. Hussain Azad at the time of accident.
Accordingly, issue no.1 is decided in favour of the petitioners/ injured and against the respondents.12. ISSUE No. 2
If yes, what is the amount of compensation which the claimant is entitled to receive and from which respondent ? ...OPP The onus to prove the abovesaid issue no. 2 in MACP No. 1507/16 was upon the petitioner/injured therein and in order to discharge the said onus, the petitioner/injuredNihar Ranjan Mohanty has examined himself as PW1 and has filed his evidence by way of affidavit (Ex. PW1/A), wherein it has been stated that he sustained in injuries in a road accident dated 07.02.2012 due to rash and negligent driving of respondent no.2, who was driving the offending vehicle DL 1LK 7210 at the time of accident. PW1 further deposed that after the accident, he was taken to DDU hospital in a PCR van, where he remained admitted from 07.02.2012 to 23.02.2012. PW1 deposed that he was working with Rout Sanitary Sons Pvt. Ltd and was earning Rs.12,000/pm at the time of accident. PW1 further deposed that he has spent about Rs.6 lacs on his treatment and the respondents were jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation. PW1 has also relied upon the documents Ex.
PW1/1 (colly.).
(MACP No. 1507/16 & 1508/16) Nihar Ranjan Mohanty Vs. Irshad & Ors. 9/35 10 In the present case, from the material and evidence record, it is clear that petitioner/injured Nihar Ranjan Mohanty has sustained injuries on account of rash and negligent driving of offending vehicle bearing no. DL 1LK 7210, which was being driven by R2 Irshad and owned by R1 Mohd. Hussain Azad at the time of accident and as such, petitioner/injured Nihar Ranjan Mohanty has become entitled to claim compensation for the injuries caused to him in the abovesaid accident.
Quantum of compensation payable to the petitioner/injuredNihar Ranjan Mohanty is ascertained under the following heads :
13. NATURE AND EXTENT OF INJURIES As per the medical treatment record pertaining to Sir Ganga Ram Hospital, New Delhi, petitioner/injured Nihar Ranjan Mohanty is a case of polytrauma with head injury with left thalamic bleed with femur fracture with naso maxillary, mandible with orbital fracture .
Further the perusal of the record reveals that petitioner/injured has not filed on record any document to show that he has suffered any permanent disability due to the injuries sustained by her in the accident in this case.
14. MEDICINES & TREATMENT In the present case, as per record, the petitioner/injured Nihar Ranjan Mohanty has undergone treatment mainly at Sir Ganga Ram Hospital, New Delhi , where he was operated and got treatment for the injuries sustained by him in the accident in this case .
Further, in regard to the abovesaid treatment undergone by him, petitioner/injured Nihar Ranjan Mohanty has placed on record the medical bills/ (MACP No. 1507/16 & 1508/16) Nihar Ranjan Mohanty Vs. Irshad & Ors. 10/35 11 receipts, amounting to Rs. 4,88,501/. In this regard, petitioner/injured has examined PW3 Sh. Pyara Singh, Medical Record Officer, Sir Ganga Ram Hospital and he has proved the entire treatment record alngwith medical bills amounting to Rs.4,88,501/ pertaining to petitioner/injured Nihar Ranjan Mohanty as Ex. PW3/1 ( colly.) . There is no reason to doubt the said bills/receipts. In these circumstances, petitioner /injured shall be entitled to a sum of Rs. 4,88,501/ towards medical expenses .
Hence, in view of the above and in view of the material on record, petitioner/injured Nihar Ranjan Mohanty is awarded the abovesaid amount i.e Rs.4,88,501 / (Rupees Four Lacs, Eighty Eight Thousand, Five Hundred One Only ) under this head.
15. CONVEYANCE & SPECIAL DIET In the present case, as per the medical treatment record, petitioner/ injured Nihar Ranjan Mohanty is a case of polytrauma with head injury with left thalamic bleed with femur fracture with naso maxillary, mandible with orbital fracture. In these circumstances, the petitioner/injured must have visited the hospital/doctors for his treatment and would also have required special diet for certain period to recover from the injuries sustained in the accident.
It is being submitted on behalf of the petitioner/injured that he has spent Rs. 50,000/ on conveyance and Rs. 2 lacs on special diet, however no evidence, documentary or otherwise, in this regard has been brought on record on behalf of the petitioner. Further, it is pertinent to note that from the material on record, it is evident that the petitioner/injured has not suffered any permanent disability due to the injuries sustained in the accident in this case.
Hence, in view of the above and in view of the material on record, petitioner/injured shall be entitled to a sum of Rs. 20,000/ (Rupees Twenty (MACP No. 1507/16 & 1508/16) Nihar Ranjan Mohanty Vs. Irshad & Ors. 11/35 12 Thousand only) towards conveyance. Further, in view of the injuries suffered by her, the petitioner/ injured must have needed special diet for a certain period to have a fast and proper recovery. In these circumstances and in view of the material on record, the petitioner/injured is also awarded Rs. 30,000/ (Rupees Thirty Thousand Only) towards expenses for special diet.
16. LOSS OF INCOME In the present case, the petitioner/injured stated that he was working with Rout Sanitary Sons Pvt. Ltd and was earning Rs.12,000/pm at the time of accident. In this regard, petitioner/injured has examined PW2 Sh Sanatan Raut, Proprietor of M/s Sanatan Raut Sanitation, who deposed that petitioner/injured was working in his firm at the time of accident and was getting salary of Rs. 12,000/ p.m and he has also proved the salary slip in this respect as Ex. PW2/A. In the instant case, petitioner/injured has suffered polytrauma with head injury with left thalamic bleed with femur fracture with naso maxillary, mandible with orbital fracture and has remained hospitalized for about 15 days . Further, in view of the material on record, it appears that it might have taken about six months for the petitioner/injured to recover from the said injuries sustained by him in the accident. In these circumstances and in view of the material on record, the petitioner/injured shall be entitled to a sum of Rs. 12,000/ x 6= Rs. 72,000/ ( Rupees Seventy Two Thousand Only) under the head ' Loss of Income'..
17. ATTENDANT CHARGES In the present case, the petitioner/injured has deposed that he had incurred expenses on attendant , however neither the said attendant has been (MACP No. 1507/16 & 1508/16) Nihar Ranjan Mohanty Vs. Irshad & Ors. 12/35 13 examined nor any documentary proof regarding the payment being made to the abovesaid attendant have been brought on record by the petitioner/ injured in this case.
In the instant case, the perusal of the record reveals that petitioner / injured Nihar Ranjan Mohanty is a case of polytrauma with head injury with left thalamic bleed with femur fracture with naso maxillary, mandible with orbital fracture and he remained hospitalized for about 15 days due to the said injuries sustained by him in the accident. In these circumstances, the petitioner/ injured must have required the services of attendant for about six months. It is pertinent to note that the petitioner/injured would have also needed an attendant to look after him, even if the gratuitous services were rendered by the some or the other of his family members. In the case titled as "Delhi Transport Corporation and Anr. V. Lalita"
(reported as AIR 1981 Delhi 558), it has been held by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi that a victim cannot be deprived of compensation towards gratuitous services rendered by some of the family members.
In these circumstances and in view of the material on record, the petitioner/injured shall be entitled to an amount of Rs. 4,000 X 6 = Rs. 24,000/ (Rupees Twenty Four Thousand Only) towards 'Attendant Charges'.
18. PAIN & SUFFERINGS As per the settled law, for assessing the pain & sufferings, the following factors have to be taken into account :
(a) Nature of injury
(b) Parts of body where injuries occurred
(c) Surgeries, if any
(d) Confinement in hospital
(e) Duration of the treatment.
(MACP No. 1507/16 & 1508/16) Nihar Ranjan Mohanty Vs. Irshad & Ors. 13/35 14 In the instant case, in view of the material/evidence on record, there is no element of doubt that the petitioner/injured has suffered polytrauma with head injury with left thalamic bleed with femur fracture with naso maxillary, mandible with orbital fracture and has remained hospitalized for about 15 days due to the said injuries sustained by him. In these circumstances and in view of the law laid down in the case titled as "Rekha Jain Vs. National Insurance Co. Ltd." (arising out of SLP (C) Nos. 564951 of 2012), the petitioner/injured is entitled to compensation on account of pain & suffering due to the accident. The pain and sufferings of petitioner/injured can not be adequately compensated in terms of money however, in view of the facts & circumstances of the present case and in view of the material on record, a sum of Rs.1,00,000/ ( Rupees One Lakh only) is awarded to the petitioner/injured towards the head " pain & sufferings".
19. LOSS OF ENJOYMENT OF LIFE AND AMENITIES The petitioner/injured has claimed that he has suffered the loss of enjoyment of life and other amenities on account of the accident. The petitioner/ injured was about 32 years of age at the time of accident and has suffered polytrauma with head injury with left thalamic bleed with femur fracture with naso maxillary, mandible with orbital fracture and was hospitalized for about 15 days due to the said injuries sustained in the accident. In these circumstances and in view of the law laid down vide judgment of Rekha Jain (Supra), the petitioner/injured shall be entitled to a sum of Rs.70,000/ (Rupees Seventy Thousand only) as compensation towards loss of enjoyment of life and amenities. In addition to this, the petitioner/ injured shall also be entitled to a sum of Rs. 30,000/ (Rupees Thirty Thousand only) as compensation for mental and physical shock suffered by her due to the accident in this case.
(MACP No. 1507/16 & 1508/16) Nihar Ranjan Mohanty Vs. Irshad & Ors. 14/35 15
20. The breakup of compensation that has been awarded to the petitioner/ injured Nihar Ranjan Mohanty is tabulated as below : S.No. HEADS AMOUNT (in Rupees) 1 Medicines & Treatment Rs. 4,88,501/
2. Conveyance Rs. 20,000/
3. Special Diet Rs. 30,000/
4. Loss of Income Rs. 72,000/
5. Attendant Rs. 24,000/
6. Pain & Sufferings Rs. 1,00,000/
7. Loss of Enjoyment of Life and Amenities Rs. 70,000/
8. Compensation for mental and physical shock Rs. 30,000/ Total Rs. 8,34,501/ rounded of as Rs. 8,35,000/
21. INTEREST In the instant case, there is nothing on record, which could justify the withholding of interest on the award amount. In these circumstances and having regard to the fact and circumstances of the present case, it will be just and proper to award interest @ 9% per annum on the award amount in this case. Hence, the petitioner/injured is awarded interest @ 9% per annum on the abovesaid compensation/ award amount i.e Rs. 8,35,000/ from the date of filing of petition i.e. 01.11.2012 till realization.
22. RELIEF IN MACP NO.1507/16 ( Nihar Ranjan Mohanty Vs. Mohd Hussain Azad &Anr.
Thus in view of the above discussion & observations and having regard (MACP No. 1507/16 & 1508/16) Nihar Ranjan Mohanty Vs. Irshad & Ors. 15/35 16 to the fact and circumstances of the present case, an award for a sum of Rs. 8,35,000 / (Rupees Eight Lacs, Thirty Five Thousand only) alongwith interest @ 9% p.a from the date of filing of the petition i.e 01.11.2012 till realization is passed in favour of the petitioner/ injured-Nihar Ranjan Mohanty and against the respondents .
23. FORMIVB SUMMARY OF THE COMPUTATION OF AWARD AMOUNT IN INJURY CASES TO BE INCORPORATED IN THE AWARD
i) Date of accident : 07.2.2012
ii). Name of the injured : Sh. Nihar Ranjan Mohanty
iii). Age of the injured : 32 years ( at the time of accident)
iv). Occupation of the injured : Private Job (at the time of accident)
v). Income of the injured : Rs. 12,000/ p.m
vi). Nature of injury : Grievous
vii). Medical treatment taken : Sir Ganga Ram Hospital, New Delhi by the injured
viii). Period of hospitalization : About 15 days
ix). Whether any permanent : No disability?If yes, give details
10. Computation of Compensation S. No. Heads Awarded by the Tribunal
11. Pecuniary Loss:
(i) Expenditure on treatment Rs. 4,88,501/
(ii) Expenditure on conveyance Rs. 20,000/
(iii) Expenditure on special diet Rs. 30,000/
(MACP No. 1507/16 & 1508/16) Nihar Ranjan Mohanty Vs. Irshad & Ors. 16/35
17
(iv) Cost of attendant Rs. 24,000/
(v) Loss of earning capacity
(vi) Loss of income Rs. 72,000/
(vii) Any other loss which may require any
special treatment or aid to the injured for
the rest of his life
12. Non Pecuniary Loss:
(i) Compensation for mental and physical Rs. 30,000/
shock
(ii) Pain and suffering Rs. 1,00,000/
(iii) Loss of amenities of life Rs. 70,000/
(iv) Disfiguration
(v) Loss of marriage prospects
(vi) Loss of earning, inconvenience, hardships,
disappointment, frustration, mental stress
dejectment and unhappiness in future life
etc.,
13. Disability resulting in loss of earning capacity
(i) Percentage of disability assessed and nature N.A of disability as permanent or temporary
(ii) Loss of amenities or loss of expectation of life span on account of disability
(iii) Percentage of loss of earning capacity in relation to disability
(iv) Loss of future income(Income x % Earning Capacity x Multiplier)
14. Total Compensation Rs. 8,34,501/ rounded of as Rs. 8,35,000/
15. INTEREST AWARDED
16. Interest amount up to the date of award @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of petition i.e. 01.11.2012 till realization.
17. Total amount including interest Rs. 8,35,000/ + interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the petition i.e. 01.11.2012 till realization.
18. Award amount released As per table given below (MACP No. 1507/16 & 1508/16) Nihar Ranjan Mohanty Vs. Irshad & Ors. 17/35 18
19. Award amount kept in FDRs As per table given below
20. Mode of disbursement of the award By credit in the SB Account of amount to the claimant(s) (Clause29) the petitioner/injured. 21 Next Date for compliance of the award. 15.7.2019 ( Clause 31)
24. Further,the statement of petitioner/injuredNihar Ranjan Mohanry regarding his financial status, needs and liabilities have also been recorded in this case . In view of the said statement of the petitioner/injured and having regard to facts and circumstances of the present case, the award amount shall be distributed as follows: S.No. Name Status Amount of Award Release Amount Amount /Period of FDR
1. Nihar Ranjan Injured Rs. 8,35,000/ Rs. 85,000/ Rs. 7.5 lacs be kept in 75 Monanty FDRs of Rs. 10,000/ each for the period from one month to 75 months in the name of petitioner/ injured with cumulative interest.
The abovesaid award amount shall be disbursed through Motor Accident Claims Annuity Deposit Scheme (MACAD Scheme) formulated vide Orders dated 01.5.2018 and 07.12.2018 passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in FAO No. 842/2013 ( Rajesh Tyagi & Ors. Vs. Jaibir Singh & Ors.).
25. The onus to prove the abovesaid issue no. 2 in MACP No. 1508/16 was upon the petitioner/injured therein and in order to discharge the said onus, the petitioner/injuredDiwakar Rout has examined himself as PW1 and has filed his (MACP No. 1507/16 & 1508/16) Nihar Ranjan Mohanty Vs. Irshad & Ors. 18/35 19 evidence by way of affidavit (Ex. PW1/A), wherein it has been stated that he sustained in injuries in a road accident dated 07.02.2012 due to rash and negligent driving of respondent no.2, who was driving the offending vehicle DL 1LK 7210 at the time of accident. PW1 further deposed that after the accident, he was taken to DDU hospital in a PCR van, where he remained admitted from 07.02.2012 to 18.4.2012. PW1 deposed that he was working with Rout Sanitary Sons Pvt. Ltd and was earning Rs.15,000/pm at the time of accident. PW1 further deposed that he has spent about Rs.19 lacs on his treatment and the respondents were jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation. PW1 has also relied upon the documents Ex. PW1/1 (colly.).
In the present case, from the material and evidence record, it is clear that petitioner/injured Diwakar Rout has sustained injuries on account of rash and negligent driving of offending vehicle bearing no. DL 1LK 7210, which was being driven by R2 Irshad and owned by R1 Mohd. Hussain Azad at the time of accident and as such, petitioner/injured Diwakar Rout has become entitled to claim compensation for the injuries caused to him in the abovesaid accident.
Quantum of compensation payable to the petitioner/injured Diwakar Rout is ascertained under the following heads :
26. NATURE AND EXTENT OF INJURIES As per the medical treatment record pertaining to Sir Ganga Ram Hospital, New Delhi, petitioner/injured Diwakar Rout is a case of polytrauma with multiple intracranial contusions , facial injury and right optic nerve injury.
Further the perusal of the record reveals that petitioner/injured has not filed on record any document to show that he has suffered any permanent disability due to the injuries sustained by her in the accident in this case.
(MACP No. 1507/16 & 1508/16) Nihar Ranjan Mohanty Vs. Irshad & Ors. 19/35 20
27. MEDICINES & TREATMENT In the present case, as per record, the petitioner/injured Diwakar Rout has undergone treatment mainly at Sir Ganga Ram Hospital, New Delhi , where he was operated and got treatment for the injuries sustained by him in the accident in this case .
Further, in regard to the abovesaid treatment undergone by him, petitioner/injured Diwakar Rout has placed on record the medical bills/ receipts, amounting to Rs. 9,39,561/. In this regard, petitioner/injured has examined PW3 Sh. Pyara Singh, Medical Record Officer, Sir Ganga Ram Hospital and he has proved the entire treatment record alngwith medical bills amounting to Rs. 9,39,561/ pertaining to petitioner/injured - Diwakar Rout as Ex. PW3/1 ( colly.) . There is no reason to doubt the said bills/receipts. In these circumstances, petitioner /injured shall be entitled to a sum of Rs. 9,39,561/ towards medical expenses .
Hence, in view of the above and in view of the material on record, petitioner/injured Diwakar Rout is awarded the abovesaid amount i.e Rs.9,39,561 / (Rupees Nine Lacs, Thirty Nine Lacs, Five Hundred Sixty One Only ) under this head.
28. CONVEYANCE & SPECIAL DIET In the present case, as per the medical treatment record, petitioner/ injured Diwakar Rout is a case of polytrauma with multiple intracranial contusions , facial injury and right optic nerve injury. In these circumstances, the petitioner/injured must have visited the hospital/doctors for his treatment and would also have required special diet for certain period to recover from the injuries sustained in the accident.
It is being submitted on behalf of the petitioner/injured that he has spent (MACP No. 1507/16 & 1508/16) Nihar Ranjan Mohanty Vs. Irshad & Ors. 20/35 21 Rs. 50,000/ on conveyance and Rs. 2 lacs on special diet, however no evidence, documentary or otherwise, in this regard has been brought on record on behalf of the petitioner. Further, it is pertinent to note that from the material on record, it is evident that the petitioner/injured has not suffered any permanent disability due to the injuries sustained in the accident in this case.
Hence, in view of the above and in view of the material on record, petitioner/injured shall be entitled to a sum of Rs. 20,000/ (Rupees Twenty Thousand only) towards conveyance. Further, in view of the injuries suffered by her, the petitioner/ injured must have needed special diet for a certain period to have a fast and proper recovery. In these circumstances and in view of the material on record, the petitioner/injured is also awarded Rs. 30,000/ (Rupees Thirty Thousand Only) towards expenses for special diet.
29. LOSS OF INCOME In the present case, the petitioner/injured stated that he was working with Rout Sanitary Sons Pvt. Ltd and was earning Rs.15,000/pm at the time of accident. In this regard, petitioner/injured has examined PW2 Sh Sanatan Raut, Proprietor of M/s Sanatan Raut Sanitation, who deposed that petitioner/injured was working in his firm at the time of accident and was getting salary of Rs. 15,000/ p.m and he has also proved the salary slip in this respect as Ex. PW2/A. In the instant case, petitioner/injured has suffered polytrauma with multiple intracranial contusions , facial injury and right optic nerve injury and has remained hospitalized for about two months . Further, in view of the material on record, it appears that it might have taken about six months for the petitioner/injured to recover from the said injuries sustained by him in the accident. In these circumstances and in view of the material on record, the petitioner/injured shall be (MACP No. 1507/16 & 1508/16) Nihar Ranjan Mohanty Vs. Irshad & Ors. 21/35 22 entitled to a sum of Rs. 15,000/ x 6= Rs. 90,000/ ( Rupees Ninety Thousand Only) under the head ' Loss of Income'..
30. ATTENDANT CHARGES In the present case, the petitioner/injured has deposed that he had incurred expenses on attendant, however neither the said attendant has been examined nor any documentary proof regarding the payment being made to the abovesaid attendant have been brought on record by the petitioner/ injured in this case.
In the instant case, the perusal of the record reveals that petitioner / injured Diwakar Rout is a case of polytrauma with multiple intracranial contusions , facial injury and right optic nerve injury and he remained hospitalized for about two months due to the said injuries sustained by him in the accident. In these circumstances, the petitioner/ injured must have required the services of attendant for about six months. It is pertinent to note that the petitioner/injured would have also needed an attendant to look after him, even if the gratuitous services were rendered by the some or the other of his family members. In the case titled as "Delhi Transport Corporation and Anr. V. Lalita" (reported as AIR 1981 Delhi 558), it has been held by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi that a victim cannot be deprived of compensation towards gratuitous services rendered by some of the family members.
In these circumstances and in view of the material on record, the petitioner/injured shall be entitled to an amount of Rs. 4,000 X 6 = Rs. 24,000/ (Rupees Twenty Four Thousand Only) towards 'Attendant Charges'.
31. PAIN & SUFFERINGS As per the settled law, for assessing the pain & sufferings, the following (MACP No. 1507/16 & 1508/16) Nihar Ranjan Mohanty Vs. Irshad & Ors. 22/35 23 factors have to be taken into account :
(a) Nature of injury
(b) Parts of body where injuries occurred
(c) Surgeries, if any
(d) Confinement in hospital
(e) Duration of the treatment.
In the instant case, in view of the material/evidence on record, there is no element of doubt that the petitioner/injured has suffered polytrauma with multiple intracranial contusions , facial injury and right optic nerve injury and has remained hospitalized for about two months due to the said injuries sustained by him. In these circumstances and in view of the law laid down in the case titled as "Rekha Jain Vs. National Insurance Co. Ltd." (arising out of SLP (C) Nos. 564951 of 2012), the petitioner/injured is entitled to compensation on account of pain & suffering due to the accident. The pain and sufferings of petitioner/injured can not be adequately compensated in terms of money however, in view of the facts & circumstances of the present case and in view of the material on record, a sum of Rs.1,00,000/ ( Rupees One Lakh only) is awarded to the petitioner/injured towards the head " pain & sufferings".
32. LOSS OF ENJOYMENT OF LIFE AND AMENITIES The petitioner/injured has claimed that he has suffered the loss of enjoyment of life and other amenities on account of the accident. The petitioner/ injured was about 31 years of age at the time of accident and has suffered polytrauma with multiple intracranial contusions , facial injury and right optic nerve injury and was hospitalized for about two months due to the said injuries sustained in the accident. In these circumstances and in view of the law laid down vide judgment of Rekha Jain (Supra), the petitioner/injured shall be entitled to a sum of (MACP No. 1507/16 & 1508/16) Nihar Ranjan Mohanty Vs. Irshad & Ors. 23/35 24 Rs. 70,000/ (Rupees Seventy Thousand only) as compensation towards loss of enjoyment of life and amenities. In addition to this, the petitioner/ injured shall also be entitled to a sum of Rs. 30,000/ (Rupees Thirty Thousand only) as compensation for mental and physical shock suffered by him due to the accident in this case.
33. The breakup of compensation that has been awarded to the petitioner/ injured Diwakar Rout is tabulated as below : S.No. HEADS AMOUNT (in Rupees) 1 Medicines & Treatment Rs. 9,39,561/
2. Conveyance Rs. 20,000/
3. Special Diet Rs. 30,000/
4. Loss of Income Rs. 90,000/
5. Attendant Rs. 24,000/
6. Pain & Sufferings Rs. 1,00,000/
7. Loss of Enjoyment of Life and Amenities Rs. 70,000/
8. Compensation for mental and physical shock Rs. 30,000/ Total Rs. 13,03,561/ rounded of as Rs. 13,04,000/
34. INTEREST In the instant case, there is nothing on record, which could justify the withholding of interest on the award amount. In these circumstances and having regard to the fact and circumstances of the present case, it will be just and proper to award interest @ 9% per annum on the award amount in this case. Hence, the petitioner/injured is awarded interest @ 9% per annum on the abovesaid compensation/ award amount i.e Rs. 13,04,000/ from the date of filing of petition (MACP No. 1507/16 & 1508/16) Nihar Ranjan Mohanty Vs. Irshad & Ors. 24/35 25 i.e. 01.11.2012 till realization.
35. RELIEF IN MACP No.1508/16 (DiwakarRout (since deceased) through LRs Vs.Mohd Hussain Azad &Anr.
Thus in view of the above discussion & observations and having regard to the fact and circumstances of the present case, an award for a sum of Rs. 13,04,000 / (Rupees Thirteen Lacs, Four Thousand only) alongwith interest @ 9% p.a from the date of filing of the petition i.e 01.11.2012 till realization is passed in favour of the petitioner/injured-Diwakar Rout and against the respondents .
36. FORMIVB SUMMARY OF THE COMPUTATION OF AWARD AMOUNT IN INJURY CASES TO BE INCORPORATED IN THE AWARD
i) Date of accident : 07.2.2012
ii). Name of the injured : Sh. Diwakar Rout
iii). Age of the injured : 31 years ( at the time of accident)
iv). Occupation of the injured : Private Job (at the time of accident)
v). Income of the injured : Rs. 15,000/ p.m
vi). Nature of injury : Grievous
vii). Medical treatment taken : Sir Ganga Ram Hospital, New Delhi by the injured
viii). Period of hospitalization : About two months
ix). Whether any permanent : No disability?If yes, give details (MACP No. 1507/16 & 1508/16) Nihar Ranjan Mohanty Vs. Irshad & Ors. 25/35 26
10. Computation of Compensation S. No. Heads Awarded by the Tribunal
11. Pecuniary Loss:
(i) Expenditure on treatment Rs. 9,39,561/
(ii) Expenditure on conveyance Rs. 20,000/
(iii) Expenditure on special diet Rs. 30,000/
(iv) Cost of attendant Rs. 24,000/
(v) Loss of earning capacity
(vi) Loss of income Rs. 90,000/
(vii) Any other loss which may require any
special treatment or aid to the injured for
the rest of his life
12. Non Pecuniary Loss:
(i) Compensation for mental and physical Rs. 30,000/
shock
(ii) Pain and suffering Rs. 1,00,000/
(iii) Loss of amenities of life Rs. 70,000/
(iv) Disfiguration
(v) Loss of marriage prospects
(vi) Loss of earning, inconvenience, hardships,
disappointment, frustration, mental stress
dejectment and unhappiness in future life
etc.,
13. Disability resulting in loss of earning capacity
(i) Percentage of disability assessed and nature N.A of disability as permanent or temporary
(ii) Loss of amenities or loss of expectation of (MACP No. 1507/16 & 1508/16) Nihar Ranjan Mohanty Vs. Irshad & Ors. 26/35 27 life span on account of disability
(iii) Percentage of loss of earning capacity in relation to disability
(iv) Loss of future income(Income x % Earning Capacity x Multiplier)
14. Total Compensation Rs. 13,03,561/ rounded of as Rs. 13,04,000/
15. INTEREST AWARDED
16. Interest amount up to the date of award @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of petition i.e. 01.11.2012 till realization.
17. Total amount including interest Rs. 13,04,000/ + interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the petition i.e. 01.11.2012 till realization.
18. Award amount released As per table given below
19. Award amount kept in FDRs As per table given below
20. Mode of disbursement of the award By credit in the SB Account of amount to the claimant(s) (Clause29) the petitioner/injured.
21 Next Date for compliance of the award. 15.7.2019 ( Clause 31)
37. It is pertinent to mention here that during the pendency of the case, petitioner/ injured Diwakar Rout (MACP No. 1508/16) has expired and an application u/o 22 rule 3 r/w Section 151 CPC for bringing on record his LRs i.e Smt. Manjulata Rout ( wife), Shrishti Rout ( daughter) and Arohi Rout ( daughter) was moved and the said application was allowed and the above named LRs of the (MACP No. 1507/16 & 1508/16) Nihar Ranjan Mohanty Vs. Irshad & Ors. 27/35 28 deceased petitioner/injuredDiwakar Rout were substituted on record in place of the said deceased petitioner/injured vide order dated 12.07.2018.
Further, the statement of the LRs of deceased petitioner/injured Diwakar Rout regarding their financial status, needs and liabilities have also been recorded in this case. In view of the said statements of the LRs of deceased petitioner/injured and having regard to fact and circumstances of the present case, the award amount shall be distributed amongst the LRs of deceased petitioner/ injured Diwakar Rout as follows: S.No. Name Status Amount of Release Amount /Period of FDR Award Amount
i) Manjulata Wife Rs. 8,04,000/ Rs. 84,000/ Rs. 7.2 lacs be kept in 72 Rout FDRs of Rs. 10,000/ each for the period from one month to 72 months in the name of petitioner Manjuata Rout .
ii) Shrishthi Minor Daughter Rs. 2,50,000/ The entire amount of Rs.
Rout 2.5 lacs be kept in the
form of FDR till petitioner
Shrishthi Rout attains
age of 18 years
iii) Arohi Minor Daughter Rs. 2,50,000/ The entire amount of Rs.
Rout 2.5 lacs be kept in the
form of FDR till petitioner
Arohi Rout attains age of
18 years
(MACP No. 1507/16 & 1508/16) Nihar Ranjan Mohanty Vs. Irshad & Ors. 28/35
29
The abovesaid award amount shall be disbursed through Motor
Accident Claims Annuity Deposit Scheme (MACAD Scheme) formulated vide Orders dated 01.5.2018 and 07.12.2018 passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in FAO No. 842/2013 ( Rajesh Tyagi & Ors. Vs. Jaibir Singh & Ors.).
38. LIABILITY IN BOTH THESE CASES BEARING MACP No.1507/16 & MACP No.1508/16 The offending vehicle bearing no. DL1LK7210 was being owned by respondent no.1 Mohd. Hussain Azad and was being driven by respondent no.2/ Irshad at the time of accident and as such, respondent no.1 Mohd. Hussain Azad and respondent no.2Irshad shall be jointly and severally liable to pay the awarded amount to the petitioners/injured in both these cases bearing MACP No.1507/16 & MACP No.1508/16.
Hence, in view of the above, Issue No. 2 is decided accordingly.
39. In both these cases bearing MACP No. 1507/16 & MACP No. 1508/16) , the award amounts shall be deposited /transferred by respondent no.1 Mohd. Hussain Azad and respondent no.2Irshad in the Account No. 37665510911 of 'MACT (SouthWest), Dwarka Courts, New Delhi ' at State Bank of India, District Court Complex, Sector10, Dwarka New Delhi (IFSC Code SBIN0011566 and MICR Code 110002483) by RTGS/NEFT/IMPS under intimation, with proof of notice to the claimant/petitioners and their counsel, to the Nazir of this court .
40. PetitionerNihar Ranjan Mohanty (petitioner/injured in MACP No. 1507/16) has stated that he is having a SB Account No. 31958100000062 at Bank of (MACP No. 1507/16 & 1508/16) Nihar Ranjan Mohanty Vs. Irshad & Ors. 29/35 30 Baroda, Vikas Puri, New Delhi (IFSC Code: BARB0VIKASP ) and it is being requested on his behalf that the abovesaid cash amount may be transferred to the said SB Account .
Accordingly, the Manager, State Bank of India, District Courts Complex, Sector10, Dwarka, New Delhi is directed to transfer the abovesaid cash amount to the abovesaid SB Account No. 31958100000062 of petitioner Nihar Ranjan Mohanty at Bank of Baroda, Vikas Puri, New Delhi and to keep the remaining amount in the form of above mentioned FDRs.
Manager, Bank of Baroda, Vikas Puri, New Delhi is directed to release the abovesaid cash amount to petitioner - Nihar Ranjan Mohanty as per rules, as prayed.
At the time of maturity, the fixed deposit amount shall be credited in the aforesaid savings bank account of petitioner - Nihar Ranjan Mohanty .
All the original FDRs shall be retained by the concerned bank, however, the statement containing FDR number, amount, date of maturity and maturity amount shall be provided to petitioner - Nihar Ranjan Mohanty .
Manager of the concerned bank is directed not to permit premature encashment or loan qua the abovesaid FDRs to the petitioner - Nihar Ranjan Mohanty without the prior permission of this court.
The said Bank of Baroda, Vikas Puri, New Delhi is also directed not to issue any cheque book and/or debit card to the petitioner - Nihar Ranjan Mohanty and if the same have already been issued, the said bank is directed to cancel the same and make an endorsement on the pass book that no cheque book or debit card shall be issued to petitioner Nihar Ranjan Mohanty .
Bank of Baroda, Vikas Puri, New Delhi shall permit account holder i.e petitioner - Nihar Ranjan Mohanty to withdraw money from his abovesaid saving (MACP No. 1507/16 & 1508/16) Nihar Ranjan Mohanty Vs. Irshad & Ors. 30/35 31 bank account by means of a withdrawal form .
41. Petitioner Manjulata Rout (petitioner no.1 (a) in MACP No. 1508/16) has stated that she is having a SB Account No. 37642395982 at State Bank of India , Branch at Pattamundai, Kendrapara, Odisa (IFSC Code: SBIN0002100 ) and it is being requested on her behalf that the abovesaid cash amount may be transferred to the said SB Account .
Accordingly, the Manager, State Bank of India, District Courts Complex, Sector10, Dwarka, New Delhi is directed to transfer the abovesaid cash amount to the abovesaid SB Account No. 37642395982 of petitioner Manjulata Rout at State Bank of India , Branch at Pattamundai, Kendrapara and to keep the remaining amount in the form of above mentioned FDRs.
Manager, State Bank of India , Branch at Pattamundai, Kendrapara is directed to release the abovesaid cash amount to petitioner - Manjulata Rout as per rules, as prayed.
At the time of maturity, the fixed deposit amount shall be credited in the aforesaid savings bank account of petitioner - Manjulata Rout .
All the original FDRs shall be retained by the concerned bank, however, the statement containing FDR number, amount, date of maturity and maturity amount shall be provided to petitioner - Manjulata Rout .
Manager of the concerned bank is directed not to permit premature encashment or loan qua the abovesaid FDRs to the petitioner - Manjulata Rout without the prior permission of this court.
The said State Bank of India , Branch at Pattamundai, Kendrapara is also directed not to issue any cheque book and/or debit card to the petitioner - Manjulata Rout and if the same have already been issued, the said bank is directed (MACP No. 1507/16 & 1508/16) Nihar Ranjan Mohanty Vs. Irshad & Ors. 31/35 32 to cancel the same and make an endorsement on the pass book that no cheque book or debit card shall be issued to petitioner Manjulata Rout .
State Bank of India , Branch at Pattamundai, Kendrapara shall permit account holder i.e petitioner - Manjulata Rout to withdraw money from her above said saving bank account by means of a withdrawal form .
42. In the present case, it is being stated that a Saving Bank Account No. 6670115142 in the name of minor petitioner Shrishti Rout (petitioner no. 1( b) in MACP No. 1508/16) has been opened at Indian Bank, main Road Oupada, Kendrapara Odisa (IFSC Code IDIB00000118) .
Accordingly, the Manager, State Bank of India, District Courts Complex, Sector10, Dwarka, New Delhi is directed to keep the abovesaid amount awarded to petitioner in the form of above mentioned FDR till petitioner Shrishti Rout attains the age of 18 years .
At the time of maturity, the fixed deposit amount shall be credited in the aforesaid savings bank account of petitioner .
The original FDR shall be retained by the concerned bank, however, the statement containing FDR number, amount, date of maturity and maturity amount shall be provided to petitioner Shrishti Rout .
Manager of the concerned bank is directed not to permit premature encashment or loan qua the abovesaid FDR to the petitioner Shrishti Rout without the prior permission of this court.
Further, the interest on the said FDRs shall be paid monthly by automatic credit /transfer of interest amount in the aforesaid SB Account of the petitioner Shrishti Rout.
The abovesaid Indian Bank, main Road Oupada, Kendrapara, Odisa is (MACP No. 1507/16 & 1508/16) Nihar Ranjan Mohanty Vs. Irshad & Ors. 32/35 33 also directed not to issue any cheque book and/or debit card to the petitioner - Shrishti Rout and if the same have already been issued, the said bank is directed to cancel the same and make an endorsement on the pass book that no cheque book or debit card shall be issued to petitioner Shrishti Rout .
Indian Bank, main Road Oupada, Kendrapara, Odisa , shall permit account holder i.e petitioner Shrishti Rout to withdraw money from her above said saving bank account by means of a withdrawal form .
43. In the instant case, it is being stated that a Saving Bank Account No. 6668354141 in the name of minor petitioner Arohi Rout (petitioner no. 1( c) in MACP No. 1508/16) has been opened at Indian Bank, main Road Oupada, Kendrapara, Odisa (IFSC Code IDIB00000118) .
Accordingly, the Manager, State Bank of India, District Courts Complex, Sector10, Dwarka, New Delhi is directed to keep the abovesaid amount awarded to petitioner in the form of above mentioned FDR till petitioner Arohi Rout attains the age of 18 years .
At the time of maturity, the fixed deposit amount shall be credited in the aforesaid savings bank account of petitioner .
The original FDR shall be retained by the concerned bank, however, the statement containing FDR number, amount, date of maturity and maturity amount shall be provided to petitioner Arohi Rout .
Manager of the concerned bank is directed not to permit premature encashment or loan qua the abovesaid FDR to the petitioner Shrishti Rout without the prior permission of this court.
Further, the interest on the said FDRs shall be paid monthly by automatic credit /transfer of interest amount in the aforesaid SB Account of the (MACP No. 1507/16 & 1508/16) Nihar Ranjan Mohanty Vs. Irshad & Ors. 33/35 34 petitioner Arohi Rout.
The abovesaid Indian Bank, main Road Oupada, Kendrapara, Odisa is also directed not to issue any cheque book and/or debit card to the petitioner - Arohi Rout and if the same have already been issued, the said bank is directed to cancel the same and make an endorsement on the pass book that no cheque book or debit card shall be issued to petitioner Arohi Rout .
Indian Bank, main Road Oupada, Kendrapara, Odisa , shall permit account holder i.e petitioner Arohi Rout to withdraw money from her abovesaid saving bank account by means of a withdrawal form .
44. The respondent no.1 Mohd. Hussain Azad and respondent no.2Irshad shall inform the petitioners as well as their counsels through registered post that the award amount is being transferred/ deposited so as to facilitate the petitioner/ injured to know about the deposit in the account.
Certified copy of this award be sent to the concerned Manager, SBI, District Courts Complex, Sector10, Dwarka, New Delhi, Manager, Bank of Baroda, Vikas Puri, New Delhi, Manager, State Bank of India , Branch at Pattamundai, Kendrapara, Odisa and Manager,Indian Bank, main Road Oupada, Kendrapara, Odisa, for information / compliance.
Copy of this award be also sent through e.mail to Sh.Rajan Singh, Assistant General Manager ( Nodal Officer), State Bank of India at his email ID :
[email protected] in terms of Order dated 07.12.2018 passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in FAO No. 842/2003.
Certified copy of this award be given ''Dasti' to the petitioners/ their counsel and respondents / their counsel.
(MACP No. 1507/16 & 1508/16) Nihar Ranjan Mohanty Vs. Irshad & Ors. 34/35 35 Certified copy of this award be also sent to the concerned Ld. Metropolitan Magistrate and Delhi State Legal Services Authority.
The main judgment be placed in the file pertaining to the case bearing MACP No. 1507/16 and the copy thereof be placed in the file of connected case bearing MACP No. 1508/16.
Ahlmad is directed to prepare separate misc. files and put up the same for filing of the compliance report on 15.7.2019.
File be consigned to the record room.
(Announced in the open (Paramjit Singh)
Court on 29.5.2019) PO, MACT (SouthWest District)
Dwarka Courts, New Delhi
29.5.2019
Digitally
signed by
PARAMJIT
PARAMJIT SINGH
SINGH Date:
2019.05.29
16:26:40
+0530
(MACP No. 1507/16 & 1508/16) Nihar Ranjan Mohanty Vs. Irshad & Ors. 35/35