Delhi District Court
Nanda Tiwari vs Hari Om on 20 December, 2025
IN THE COURT OF MS. ADITI GARG
DISTRICT JUDGE AND ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE
PO MACT (SE), SAKET COURTS : NEW DELHI
MACT No.450/2018
FIR no. 84/2018
PS: Jaitpur
U/s 279/337/338/304A IPC & 3/181, 185 MV Act
CNR No. DLSE01-002698-2018
Nanda Tiwari & Ors. Vs. Hari Om & Anr
(Case of deceased Triyugi Nath Tiwari)
1. Nanda Tiwari (wife of deceased)
W/o Late Sh. Triyugi Nath Tiwari.
(During proceedings Smt. Nanda Tiwari expired on 11.01.2024 and her name was deleted
from the array of parties vide order dated 22.02.2024)
2. Neha Tiwari (daughter of deceased)
3. Abhay (son of deceased)
All R/o H. No. 32/195, Trilokpuri,
Patparganj, East Delhi.
4. Vimla Devi (mother of deceased)
R/o Agethua, Faizabad, Devri, Uttar Pradesh.
...Claimants
Versus
1. Hari Om
S/o Sh. Ram Narayan
R/o H. No. 106, Rasoolpur,
MACT No. 450/2018 Nanda Tiwari & Ors. Vs. Hari Om & Anr. Page No. 1 of 37
Sultanpuri, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh.
..... Driver cum owner/ R-1
2. Tata AIG Gen. Ins. Co. Ltd.
DTJ -415, 4th Floor
DLF-Tower B, Jasola Distt. Centre,
New Delhi.
..... Insurance Company/R-2
Date of accident : 13/14.02.2018
(midnight)
Date of filing of petition : 02.04.2018
Date of Decision : 20.12.2025
AWARD
1. Claim Petition:
(a) Claim petition under Section 166 and 140 M.V. Act was
filed on 02.04.2018 by Smt. Nanda Tiwari (since deceased), Ms.
Neha Tiwari and Sh. Abhay and Smt. Vimla Devi, (hereinafter
called the LRs/claimants) on account of fatal injury sustained by
Late Sh. Triyugi Nath Tiwari (hereinafter referred as deceased)
allegedly in an accident which took place on 13/14.02.2018
(midnight) due to rash and negligent driving of vehicle no. UP-32
HK 0402 (hereinafter referred as Offending Vehicle), driven &
owned by Sh. Hari Om (hereinafter referred as R-1) and insured
with M/s Tata AIG Gen. Ins. Co. Ltd. (hereinafter referred as
R-2).
2. BRIEF FACTS AS ALLEGED IN THE PETITION:
(a). On 14.02.2018 at about 11:45 PM, the deceased along with
Sh. Subham Pandey, Sh. Sachin, Ms. Neha Tiwari, Sh Vikash
MACT No. 450/2018 Nanda Tiwari & Ors. Vs. Hari Om & Anr. Page No. 2 of 37
Tiwari and Sh. Rohit Tiwari were returning to their residence in a
car bearing registration No. DL 14CD 0275 after attending a
marriage in Jaitpur. When they reached Agra Canal Road, near
Lakkar Market, Kanchan Kunj, Madanpur Khadar, Jaitpur, New
Delhi, a speedily and rashly driven vehicle bearing registration
No. UP 32HK 0402 (XUV) came from the opposite direction on
the wrong side of the road and collided with car No. DL 14CD
0275. As a result, all occupants of the car sustained serious
injuries. Further, Sh. Vikash Tiwari and victim Sh. Triyugi Nath
Tiwari succumbed to the injuries and died in the accident.
3. Particulars of DAR:
(a) It is noted that, since the accident occurred within the
jurisdiction of this Tribunal, a Detailed Accident Report (DAR)
was also filed by the Investigating Officer in a connected matter
bearing MACT No. 939/2018. As per the facts of the DAR,
preliminary information regarding the accident was received at
PS Jaitpur at midnight of 13/14.02.2018 vide DD No. 3A. Upon
receipt of the information, the police officials, including the IO,
proceeded to the spot at Agra Canal Road in front of Lakkar
Market. They found a Celerio car bearing registration No. DL
14CD 0275 (the accidental vehicle in the present case) on the
road towards Mithapur and the offending vehicle bearing
registration No. UP 32HK 0402 on the road coming from Kalindi
Kunj, both in a damaged condition. The rear portion of the
offending vehicle was lying in the middle of the road facing east
and the engine portion was lying towards the west, on the wrong
side of the road. Both vehicles were damaged from the front.
Bloodstains and spilled items were found in the vehicles. It was
also noted that a whisky bottle of the brand "Signature" was lying
MACT No. 450/2018 Nanda Tiwari & Ors. Vs. Hari Om & Anr. Page No. 3 of 37
on the front seat of the offending XUV.
(b) Police officials then proceeded to AIIMS Trauma Center,
where they obtained the MLCs of the injured persons, namely
Abhay Tiwari, Shubham, Vikash, Triloki Nath Tiwari, and Hari
Om, all with an alleged history of a road traffic accident. Injured
Abhay, Shivam, and Hari Om were declared unfit for giving
statements. Police officials also obtained the MLCs of injured
Sachin, Kuldeep, Rohit Tiwari, and Neha from Apollo Hospital,
who were also declared unfit for giving statements.
(c) The statement of ASI Maharaj Singh was recorded. He
stated that on 13/14.02.2018 he was on patrolling duty in the
ERV vehicle from 08:00 PM to 08:00 AM along with HC Sher
Singh. When they were proceeding towards Mithapur from
Kalindi Kunj via Agra Canal Road, at about 11:50-12:00
midnight, they heard a loud noise of a collision. On reaching the
spot, they found that the offending XUV had struck the Celerio
car from the wrong side. The injured occupants of both vehicles
were screaming for help. He further stated that two boys were
trapped inside the XUV. With the assistance of HC Sher Singh
and other members of the public, he rescued Hari Om, who was
stuck in the driver's seat, and Kuldeep from the co-driver's seat.
They also rescued the injured occupants of the Celerio car. All
injured persons from both vehicles were taken to AIIMS Trauma
Centre, while some were shifted to Apollo Hospital. Vikash
Tiwari and Triloki Nath Tiwari were declared brought dead. An
FIR was registered under the relevant provisions of law.
(d) Both vehicles were seized and got mechanically inspected.
The whisky bottle found in the offending vehicle was also seized
MACT No. 450/2018 Nanda Tiwari & Ors. Vs. Hari Om & Anr. Page No. 4 of 37
by the IO. Post-mortem examinations of the deceased were
conducted. The documents of the offending vehicle were
obtained and verified and found to be in order. The driver of the
offending XUV could not produce his driving licence upon
inquiry and was penalized under Section 3/181 of the MV Act.
The IO obtained medical opinions regarding the nature of
injuries, which were opined to be "grievous" to some of the
injured and "simple" for rest of them. Post-mortem reports of the
deceased were also collected. Statements under Section 161
Cr.P.C. of the injured persons were recorded. After completion of
the investigation, the driver of the offending XUV was
chargesheeted under the relevant penal provisions. The DAR was
accordingly filed by the IO.
4. Written Statement/ Reply:
(a). In WS/ Reply filed on behalf of R-1/ driver cum owner, it
is submitted that R-1 has falsely been implicated in this matter as
the XUV vehicle bearing Reg. No. UP 32HK 0402 was actually
driven by his driver namely Kuldeep. He further submitted that
the accident caused due to the negligence on part of driver of
Celerio bearing Reg. No. DL 14C 0275 who drive the accidental
car in rash and negligent manner and hit the XUV resulting
injuries to occupants of XUV. He also stated that he lost one eye
from the injuries sustained in the accident. It is further submitted
that R-1/ driver was holding valid driving license at the time of
accident while has falsely been implicated under 3/181 MV Act
by IO.
(b). A Written Statement/Reply has also been filed on behalf of
the insurance company, wherein statutory defences have been
raised. The insurer has contended that the driver of the offending
MACT No. 450/2018 Nanda Tiwari & Ors. Vs. Hari Om & Anr. Page No. 5 of 37
vehicle was allegedly driving without a valid driving licence and
under the influence of alcohol, which amounts to a breach of the
terms and conditions of the insurance policy. Consequently, the
insurance company has sought to avoid its liability.
(c). It is further stated that the Celerio car was carrying
occupants in excess of its permissible seating capacity of five
persons, including the driver. It is alleged that two persons were
seated in the front passenger seat next to the driver, which
allegedly hampered the driver/claimant's ability to control the
vehicle. The insurer has contended that travelling with occupants
in excess of the permissible seating capacity amounted to
overloading and contributed to the occurrence of the accident.
The validity and genuineness of the insurance policy, however,
have been admitted.
5. Issues:
(a) From the pleadings of parties, following issues were
framed vide order dated 03.12.2018:
1) Whether the deceased Triyugi Nath Tiwari
suffered fatal injuries in a road traffic accident
on 14.02.2018 due to rash and negligent driving
of vehicle no. UP 32HK 0402 being driven and
owned by R-1 and insured with R-2 ? OPP.
2) Whether the claimants are entitled to any
compensation, if so, to what extent and from
whom ? OPP.
3) Relief.
6. Evidence:
(a) Matter was then listed for evidence. PW-1 Smt. Nanda
Tiwari (wife of deceased) tendered her evidentiary affidavit as
MACT No. 450/2018 Nanda Tiwari & Ors. Vs. Hari Om & Anr. Page No. 6 of 37
Ex.PW1/A and relied upon following documents:
Ex.PW1/1- Aadhar Cards of deceased & all the dependents
Ex.PW1/2- ID Card issued by employer of deceased Vikash
Tiwari
Ex.PW1/3- Education Certificates of deceased Vikash Tiwari
Ex.PW1/4- Medical Treatment record & Medical bills of injured
Abhay Tiwari
Ex.PW1/5- Medical treatment record of injured Neha
Mark A- 10th class certificate of her deceased husband.
PW-1 was further cross examined on behalf of counsel for
insurance company.
(b) Petitioner Evidence was closed. Matter was then listed for
Respondent Evidence.
(c) R1W1 Hari Om (driver cum owner of offending vehicle to
the present accident) tendered his Evidentiary Affidavit as
Ex.R1W1/A. He relied upon various documents as Ex.R1W1/1 to
Ex.R1W1/5 including his Aadhar Card and Driving License. He
was also crosse examined at length by counsel for insurance
company.
(d) Respondent Evidence was then closed. Matter was
thereafter listed for final arguments.
7. Final Arguments:
(a) Final arguments were advanced by counsel for claimant as
well as counsel for R-2/ Insurance Company.
(b) Learned counsel for the claimant argued that the accident
occurred solely due to the rash and reckless driving of the driver
of the offending vehicle, who entered the wrong side of the road
and violently struck the vehicle in which the claimant was
travelling. It was submitted that the very manner of the collision
MACT No. 450/2018 Nanda Tiwari & Ors. Vs. Hari Om & Anr. Page No. 7 of 37
leaves no scope for doubt regarding the negligence attributable to
the offending vehicle. Counsel further contended that there is no
dispute with respect to the involvement of the offending vehicle
or the identity of its driver. It was further argued that at the time
of the accident, deceased Sh. Triyugi Nath Tiwari was working as
security guard and earning Rs.18,000/- per month. It is submitted
that the untimely and tragic death of deceased has caused
irreparable loss and suffering to the claimants. The sudden
demise of deceased has completely shattered the claimants, not
only emotionally but also financially. Counsel for claimant,
therefore, requested that surviving family members of deceased
must be compensated for the irreparable loss. Written
Submissions was also filed on behalf of claimants.
(c) No one appeared on behalf of R-1/ driver cum owner to
make any submissions during Final Arguments.
(d) The insurance company, on the other hand, contended that
the present case squarely falls within the category of breach of
policy conditions. It was argued that at the time of the accident,
the driver of the offending vehicle was not holding a valid and
effective driving licence and was, therefore, driving the vehicle in
violation of the statutory requirements. It was further contended
that the driver was under the influence of alcohol at the relevant
time and, on account of the said conduct, he was charge-sheeted
under the appropriate provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act for
driving without a valid licence as well as for drunken driving.
Counsel for the insurance company further submitted that the
driving licence subsequently produced by the driver Hari Om,
purportedly issued from the State of Manipur, is a procured
document obtained at a belated stage only to evade liability. It
MACT No. 450/2018 Nanda Tiwari & Ors. Vs. Hari Om & Anr. Page No. 8 of 37
was argued that the circumstances surrounding the issuance of
the said licence raise serious doubts about its authenticity,
particularly in view of the fact that the driver admittedly belongs
to Uttar Pradesh and was residing in Faridabad at the time of the
accident. It was also contended that the driver attempted to
mislead the investigation by falsely projecting one Kuldeep as
the driver of the offending vehicle at the time of the accident,
which further undermines the credibility of his defence.
(e) In support of her submissions, counsel for the insurance
company placed reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble High
Court of Delhi in Indraprastha Logistics Private Limited vs.
Naveen Kumar & Ors., MAC APP No. 113/2021, to contend that
in cases of established drunken driving, the insurance company is
entitled to recovery rights.
(f) It was further argued that the driver of the victims' vehicle
(Celerio), was also negligent, as the vehicle was carrying seven
occupants against its permissible seating capacity of five persons.
According to the insurance company, such overloading materially
contributed to the occurrence of the accident, and therefore, the
case warrants a finding of contributory negligence on the part of
the occupants of the Celerio car.
8. Discussion:
ISSUE NO.1
1) Whether the deceased Triyugi Nath Tiwari
suffered fatal injuries in a road traffic accident
on 14.02.2018 due to rash and negligent driving
of vehicle no. UP 32HK 0402 being driven and
owned by R-1 and insured with R-2 ? OPP.
(a). PW-1/Smt. Nanda Tiwari, wife of the deceased Late Sh.
Triyugi Nath Tiwari appeared in the witness box as PW-1 and
MACT No. 450/2018 Nanda Tiwari & Ors. Vs. Hari Om & Anr. Page No. 9 of 37
deposed regarding the circumstances of the present accident as
well as her relationship with the victim. However, she
categorically stated that she was not present in the vehicle
bearing No. DL-14CD-0275 at the time of the accident and,
therefore, is not an eyewitness to the occurrence.
(b) Since Sh. Rohit (injured/claimant in the connected case
bearing MACT No. 447/2018) has also been examined in the said
connected matter arising out of the same accident, his deposition
with respect to the mode and manner of the accident is read in
evidence and relied upon in the present case as well. Sh. Rohit
has affirmed in his evidentiary affidavit Ex.PW1/A (in connected
case) that on 13.02.2018 at about 11:45 PM (though as per the
DAR, the accident occurred between the midnight of 13.02.2018
and 14.02.2018), he, along with Shubham Pandey, Sachin
Mishra, Neha Tiwari, Triyugi Nath Tiwari, Vikash Tiwari and
Abhay Tiwari, was returning home in a Celerio car bearing
registration No. DL-14CD-0275 after attending a marriage
ceremony at Jaitpur. When they reached Agra Canal Road near
Lakkar Market, Kalindi Kunj, Madanpur Khadar, New Delhi,
their vehicle was hit from the wrong side by a rashly and speedily
driven vehicle bearing registration No. UP-32HK-0402. As a
result, the occupants of the Celerio car sustained serious injuries,
and Vikash Tiwari and Triyugi Nath Tiwari succumbed to their
injuries.
(c) During cross-examination by the counsel for the insurance
company, PW-1 clarified that he was seated in the middle seat of
the Celerio (DL-14CD-0275). He stated that three other
occupants were seated in the rear seat along with him, and three
persons were seated in the front seat. He denied the suggestion
MACT No. 450/2018 Nanda Tiwari & Ors. Vs. Hari Om & Anr. Page No. 10 of 37
that the accident occurred due to the negligence of the Celerio's
driver on account of overloading or loss of control, and also
denied that the accident did not occur due to the negligence of the
driver of the offending XUV (UP-32HK-0402).
(d) During cross-examination by the counsel for the driver-
cum-owner of the offending XUV, PW-1 stated that seven
persons were travelling in the Celerio and admitted that its
seating capacity was only five persons. He also admitted that two
persons seated in the front could not fasten their seat belts. He
further clarified that the accident occurred on a two-way road
without a divider, and he did not remember whether streetlights
were installed near the spot. He denied the suggestion that the
Celerio was overloaded, driven at high speed, or that its driver
lost control, resulting in the accident. He also stated that two
persons were sitting in the XUV. He denied the suggestion that a
person seated in the rear of a car cannot see the driver of an
oncoming vehicle. He also deposed that he had seen who was
driving the offending car.
(e) Contrary to the allegations made by the injured/ claimant
and the contents of the charge sheet, Respondent No.1, the
driver-cum-owner of the vehicle, filed his written statement
wherein he asserted that at the time of the accident, the vehicle
(XUV) was being driven by his driver, Kuldeep. He further
examined himself as a witness and tendered his evidence by way
of affidavit (Ex. R1W1/1).
(f) He also examined himself in the witness box. In his
evidentiary affidavit, Respondent No.1 deposed that on
13.02.2018 at about 11:30 PM, he along with his driver Kuldeep
MACT No. 450/2018 Nanda Tiwari & Ors. Vs. Hari Om & Anr. Page No. 11 of 37
was travelling from Noida to Faridabad. He stated that he was
seated on the front co-driver seat next to Kuldeep, who was
driving the vehicle. Upon reaching near Lakkar Market, Kalindi
Kunj, a car bearing registration No. DL-14-CD-0275 allegedly
came from the Faridabad side in a rash and negligent manner and
struck their vehicle from the front, causing extensive damage. He
further deposed that as a result of the impact, he lost
consciousness and, upon regaining consciousness, found himself
admitted to Apollo Hospital. He claimed that due to the accident,
he suffered complete loss of vision in both eyes; however, after
undergoing major surgery, the vision in his right eye was restored
to the extent of approximately 70%, whereas the left eye was
completely damaged. He further stated that an artificial eye was
transplanted in his left eye. He also claimed that at the time of the
accident, he was holding a valid driving licence.
(g) In the present case, the accidental vehicle, i.e., a Celerio
car, was carrying seven occupants, all of whom sustained injuries
in the accident. Tragically, two out of the seven occupants
succumbed to their injuries. It is pertinent to note that a Detailed
Accident Report (DAR) has also been filed in one of the
connected matters. As per the DAR and the statements of the
victims, the accident occurred in the intervening night of
13.02.2018 and 14.02.2018 at about 11:30 PM, which also
consistently reflected in the subsequent documents prepared in
connection with the accident. The information regarding the
accident was first received and recorded vide DD No. 3A dated
14.02.2018, which notes that the information was received at
about 12:02 AM (midnight). The police authorities promptly
acted upon the said information. Both the accidental vehicle and
MACT No. 450/2018 Nanda Tiwari & Ors. Vs. Hari Om & Anr. Page No. 12 of 37
the offending vehicle were found at the spot in accordance with
the information received. The accident was witnessed by several
persons, including the victims themselves, nearby public persons,
and the police officials who arrived at the spot soon after
receiving the information. The police also recorded the
statements of several witnesses having direct or indirect
knowledge of the incident. All the injured victims were rescued
by the police personnel with the assistance of nearby public
persons and were shifted to hospitals for medical treatment. The
medical records from AIIMS Trauma Centre and Apollo
Hospital, which form part of the record, corroborate the
occurrence of the road traffic accident as well as the rescue
operations and subsequent hospitalization of the victims.
(h) There is no dispute between the contesting parties
regarding the occurrence of the accident in question. However,
the driver of the offending vehicle, namely Hari Om (Respondent
No.1), attempted to shift the primary negligence upon the driver
of the Celerio car, alleging that the said vehicle was being driven
in a rash and negligent manner. Simultaneously, it was also
sought to be projected that rather it was Kuldeep who was
driving the XUV vehicle at the relevant time and not it was Hari
Om. However, the version of R-1/ driver cum onwer in his
defence does not inspire confidence and stands weakened from
the material available on record. As per the Detailed Accident
Report (DAR), Hari Om was rescued by the police officials from
the driver seat of the offending XUV, whereas Kuldeep was
rescued from the co-driver seat. The said position is duly
reflected from the statements of police officials and other
contemporaneous documents forming part of the DAR. Further,
MACT No. 450/2018 Nanda Tiwari & Ors. Vs. Hari Om & Anr. Page No. 13 of 37
during cross-examination, R1W1 (Hari Om) himself admitted
that he had become unconscious immediately after the accident.
This admission assumes significance, as it rules out any
reasonable possibility of exchange of seats after the accident. The
consistent and cogent documentary and oral evidence thus clearly
establishes that Hari Om himself was driving the offending XUV
at the time of the accident. Accordingly, the plea raised to dispute
his role as the driver is rejected.
(i) The next and more crucial aspect for determination is the
issue of rashness and negligence and whether the act of the
vehicle which had a direct causal connection with the accident. In
this regard, it is an admitted and well-established fact on record
that the offending XUV was found on the wrong side / lane of the
road. The DAR, including the site plan, mechanical inspection
report, and statements of witnesses, including police officials,
consistently indicate that the XUV had crossed onto the opposite
lane. Although the road at the place of accident did not have a
physical divider, it was clearly demarcated for two-way traffic by
road markings. Driving beyond the designated lane and entering
the opposite carriageway amounts to a clear violation of traffic
norms and, by itself, constitutes negligence. The presence of the
offending vehicle on the wrong side of the road sufficiently
establishes that the accident occurred due to the fault of the
driver of the XUV. As regards the manner of driving, while there
is no direct evidence of the exact speed of the offending vehicle,
the surrounding circumstances provide a reasonable inference.
The accident occurred around midnight, when less traffic
generally moves, increasing the likelihood of vehicles being
driven at higher speeds. On undivided roads, higher speed often
MACT No. 450/2018 Nanda Tiwari & Ors. Vs. Hari Om & Anr. Page No. 14 of 37
results in unsafe overtaking and loss of lane discipline. The
severity of the impact, the frontal collision, and the fact that
occupants of the vehicle were trapped inside, leaving no scope
for self-rescue, further indicate that the offending vehicle was
being driven at a speed unsafe for the road and traffic conditions
prevailing at that time.
(j) So far as the contention raised by the insurance company
that the driver of the Celerio car was guilty of contributory
negligence on account of carrying passengers beyond the
permissible seating capacity is concerned, the same does not
merit acceptance. It is not disputed that at the time of the
accident, seven persons were travelling in the Celerio car. Mere
violation of seating capacity, however, does not ipso facto lead to
an inference of contributory negligence unless it is further shown
that such overloading had a direct and proximate causal
connection with the occurrence of the accident. In the present
case, no evidence has been brought on record by the insurance
company to demonstrate that the alleged overloading of the
Celerio car either resulted in loss of control or otherwise
contributed to the happening of the accident. There is no material
to show that the driver of the Celerio was unable to steer, brake,
or respond to the traffic situation due to the presence of extra two
passengers. The plea of contributory negligence has remained a
bare assertion, unsupported by any technical, ocular or
documentary evidence. On the contrary, the evidence on record
consistently establishes that the offending XUV was being driven
on the wrong side of the road and collided head-on with the
Celerio. The cause of the accident thus stands clearly attributable
to the wrongful act of entering the opposite lane by the offending
MACT No. 450/2018 Nanda Tiwari & Ors. Vs. Hari Om & Anr. Page No. 15 of 37
vehicle. The mere fact that the Celerio was carrying passengers
beyond its seating capacity, though a statutory violation, does not
dilute or neutralize the primary negligence of the offending
vehicle, nor does it shift any portion of liability in the absence of
proof of a causal nexus. It is well settled that contributory
negligence cannot be presumed and must be proved by cogent
evidence. In the absence of any such proof showing that
overloading of the Celerio had any role to play in causing or
contributing to the accident, the plea raised by the insurance
company is rejected.
(k) As per the charge sheet, Respondent No.1, the driver of the
offending vehicle, has been charge-sheeted for causing injuries to
several occupants and the death of two victims on account of his
rash and speedy driving. There is nothing on record to disbelieve
or contradict the basis of the charge sheet. The material placed
before the Tribunal leaves no room for doubt that Hari Om was
negligent while driving the offending vehicle. The injured
claimant in the present case, as well as the other victims of the
accident, have consistently and categorically supported the same
material facts in their respective testimonies clearly establishsing
that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the
offending XUV.
(l) It is settled that filing of charge sheet itself is a significant
step towards the inference of negligence on the part of driver of
the offending vehicle. (Support drawn from the Judgment in the
case of National Insurance Company Vs. Pushpa Rana 2009 ACJ
287 Delhi as referred and relied by Hon'ble Supreme Court of
India in case of Ranjeet & Anr. Vs. Abdul Kayam Neb & Anr
SLP (C) No. 10351/2019).
MACT No. 450/2018 Nanda Tiwari & Ors. Vs. Hari Om & Anr. Page No. 16 of 37
(m) It is a well-established legal principle that negligence in
motor accident cases should be determined based on the
preponderance of probabilities, not on proof beyond reasonable
doubt. The facts and circumstances must be considered in a broad
and practical manner. It is also settled that proceedings under the
Motor Vehicles Act are different from regular civil suits and are
not strictly governed by the technical rules of the Indian
Evidence Act. (as observed by Their Lordships of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court of India in the case of Bimla Devi & Ors. v.
Himachal Road Transport Corporation & Ors., (2009) 13 SCC
530 further referred and relied by Hon'ble Supreme Court of
India in recent pronouncement in the case of Mathew Alexander
vs Mohammed Shafi SLP (Crl) No.8211 of 2022).
(n). The entirety of the evidence discussed points to the
inescapable conclusion that the accident resulted from the rash
and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle. In
light of the aforementioned findings, Issue No. 1 is hereby
decided in favor of the petitioners and against the respondents.
ISSUE NO. 2
Whether the claimant is entitled to any compensation, if
so, to what extent and from whom?OPP
9. Section. 168 MV Act enjoins the Claim Tribunals to hold
an enquiry into the claim to make an effort determining the
amount of compensation which appears to it to be just and
reasonable. Same is reproduced hereunder for ready reference:
(1) Award of the Claims Tribunal.--On receipt of an
application for compensation made under section 166, the
Claims Tribunal shall, after giving notice of the
MACT No. 450/2018 Nanda Tiwari & Ors. Vs. Hari Om & Anr. Page No. 17 of 37
application to the insurer and after giving the parties
(including the insurer) an opportunity of being heard, hold
an inquiry into the claim or, as the case may be, each of
the claims and, subject to the provisions of section 162
may make an award determining the amount of
compensation which appears to it to be just and specifying
the person or persons to whom compensation shall be paid
and in making the award the Claims Tribunal shall specify
the amount which shall be paid by the insurer or owner or
driver of the vehicle involved in the accident or by all or
any of them, as the case may be: Provided that where such
application makes a claim for compensation under section
140 in respect of the death or permanent disablement of
any person, such claim and any other claim (whether made
in such application or otherwise) for compensation in
respect of such death or permanent disablement shall be
disposed of in accordance with the provisions of Chapter
X.
(2) The Claims Tribunal shall arrange to deliver copies of
the award to the parties concerned expeditiously and in
any case within a period of fifteen days from the date of
the award.
(3) When an award is made under this section, the person
who is required to pay any amount in terms of such award
shall, within thirty days of the date of announcing the
award by the Claims Tribunal, deposit the entire amount
awarded in such manner as the Claims Tribunal may
direct.
10. Before putting in frame the position of law, it is noted that
the process of determining the compensation by the court is
essentially a very difficult task and can never be an exact science.
Perfect compensation is hardly possible, more so in claims of
injury and disability. (As observed by Hon'ble Supreme Court of
India in the case of Sidram Vs. The Divisional Manager United
India Insurance Company Ltd, SLP (Civil) No. 19277 of 2019).
11. The basic principle in assessing motor vehicle
compensation claims, is to place the victim in as near a position
as she or he was in before the accident, with other compensatory
MACT No. 450/2018 Nanda Tiwari & Ors. Vs. Hari Om & Anr. Page No. 18 of 37
directions for loss of amenities and other payments. These
general principles have been stated and reiterated in several
decisions. [Support drawn from Govind Yadav v. New India
Insurance Co. Ltd., (2011) 10 SCC 683.]
12. This Tribunal has been tasked with determination of just
compensation. The observation of Hon'ble Supreme Court of
India in Divisional Controller, KSRTC v. Mahadeva Shetty and
Another, (2003) 7 SCC 197, needs mention here (para 15):
"Statutory provisions clearly indicate that the
compensation must be "just" and it cannot be a bonanza;
not a source of profit but the same should not be a
pittance. The courts and tribunals have a duty to weigh the
various factors and quantify the amount of compensation,
which should be just. What would be "just" compensation
is a vexed question. There can be no golden rule applicable
to all cases for measuring the value of human life or a
limb. Measure of damages cannot be arrived at by precise
mathematical calculations. It would depend upon the
particular facts and circumstances, and attending peculiar
or special features, if any. Every method or mode adopted
for assessing compensation has to be considered in the
background of "just" compensation which is the pivotal
consideration. Though by use of the expression "which
appears to it to be just", a wide discretion is vested in the
Tribunal, the determination has to be rational, to be done
by a judicious approach and not the outcome of whims,
wild guesses and arbitrariness.. ..."
13. Delineating the damages as pecuniary and non pecuniary,
Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, in case of R. D. Hattangadi Vs.
Pest Control (India) Pvt Ltd, 1995 AIR 755, made following
observations:
"9....while fixing an amount of compensation payable to a
victim of an accident, the damages have to be assessed
separately as pecuniary damages and special damages.
MACT No. 450/2018 Nanda Tiwari & Ors. Vs. Hari Om & Anr. Page No. 19 of 37
Pecuniary damages are those which the victim has actually
incurred and which are capable of being calculated in
terms of money; whereas non-pecuniary damages are
those which are incapable of being assessed by
arithmetical calculations. In order to appreciate two
concepts pecuniary damages may include expenses
incurred by the claimant: (i) medical attendance; (ii) loss
of earning of profit up to the date of trial; (iii) other
material loss. So far non- pecuniary damages are
concerned, they may include (i) damages for mental and
physical shock, pain and suffering, already suffered or
likely to be suffered in future; (ii) damages to compensate
for the loss of amenities of life which may include a
variety of matters i.e. on account of injury the claimant
may not be able to walk, run or sit; (iii) damages for the
loss of expectation of life, i.e., on account of injury the
normal longevity of the person concerned is shortened;
(iv) inconvenience, hardship, discomfort, disappointment,
frustration and mental stress in life."
14. In The Landmark Case of National Insurance Company
Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi And Others (2017 SCC Online SC
1270), decided by constitutional bench of Hon'ble Supreme Court
of India, regarding the concept of 'just compensation' it was
held :
"................55. Section 168 of the Act deals with the
concept of "just compensation" and the same has to be
determined on the foundation of fairness,
reasonableness and equitability on acceptable legal
standard because such determination can never be in
arithmetical exactitude. It can never be perfect. The
aim is to achieve an acceptable degree of proximity to
arithmetical precision on the basis of materials brought
on record in an individual case. The conception of
"just compensation" has to be viewed through the
prism of fairness, reasonableness and non-violation of
the principle of equitability. In a case of death, the
legal heirs of the claimants cannot expect a windfall.
Simultaneously, the compensation granted cannot be
an apology for compensation. It cannot be a pittance.
Though the discretion vested in the tribunal is quite
MACT No. 450/2018 Nanda Tiwari & Ors. Vs. Hari Om & Anr. Page No. 20 of 37
wide, yet it is obligatory on the part of the tribunal to
be guided by the expression, that is, "just
compensation". The determination has to be on the
foundation of evidence brought on record as regards
the age and income of the deceased and thereafter the
apposite multiplier to be applied. The formula relating
to multiplier has been clearly stated in Sarla Verma and
it has been approved in Reshma Kumari . The age and
income, as stated earlier, have to be established by
adducing evidence. The tribunal and the courts have to
bear in mind that the basic principle lies in pragmatic
computation which is in proximity to reality. It is a
well-accepted norm that money cannot substitute a life
lost but an effort has to be made for grant of just
compensation having uniformity of approach. There
has to be a balance between the two extremes, that is, a
windfall and the pittance, a bonanza and the modicum.
In such an adjudication, the duty of the tribunal and the
courts is difficult and hence, an endeavour has been
made by this Court for standardisation which in its
ambit includes addition of future prospects on the
proven income at present..................."
15. Further about the principles relating to Assessment of
compensation in case of death, it was held in Pranay Sethi (supra)
that detailed analysis of Sarla Verma (SMT) And Others Versus
Delhi Transport Corporation And Another (2009 Scc Online Sc
797) is necessary as in the said case, the Court recapitulated the
relevant principles relating to assessment of compensation in case
of death. In fact, Hon'ble SC in Pranay Sethi (supra) mainly
relied and approved the earlier judgment of Sarla Verma( Supra)
read with Reshma Kumari[( 2013) 9 SCC 65 : (2013) 4 SCC
(Civ) 191 : (2013) 3 SCC (Cri) 826 ], with some modification,
regarding all the aspects like aspect of multiplier,the steps and
guidelines stated in para 19 of Sarla Verma for determination of
compensation in cases of death, future prospects, deduction to be
made towards personal and living expenses.
MACT No. 450/2018 Nanda Tiwari & Ors. Vs. Hari Om & Anr. Page No. 21 of 37
ASSESSMENT OF COMPENSATION
16. PW-1, Smt. Nanda Tiwari (wife of the deceased), in her
evidentiary affidavit Ex. PW1/A, deposed that her deceased
husband was working as a security guard with SIS Security &
Intelligence Services (I) Pvt. Ltd. and was earning a sum of
Rs.18,000/- per month. However, she admitted that no
documentary proof in support of the said employment or income
of the deceased has been placed on record. A copy of the High
School mark sheet of the deceased, Triyugi Nath Tiwari, has been
filed on record as Mark-A. The same reflects the result as "Fail"
and, therefore, the deceased cannot be treated as a matriculate.
Further, as per the Aadhaar Card, the deceased was a resident of
Patparganj, Delhi. Accordingly, his income is assessed on the
basis of minimum wages applicable in the State of Delhi at the
time of the accident for a non-matriculate worker, which were
Rs.14,958/- per month.
17. As per Aadhar Card of deceased filed on record as
Ex.PW1/1 (colly), his birth of year is mentioned to be 1970 as
such, he was about 48 years of age at the time of accident. As
deceased was between the age of 40 to 50 years (at the time of
accident) and purportedly earning fixed income, thus as
mandated in case of Pranay Sethi (Supra) and other case laws, the
percentage towards future prospect is taken to be @ 25 %.
Step No- 1 : Ascertainment of Multiplicand:
18. As per the affidavits of the LRs on record, the deceased is
survived by his wife and two minor children, namely daughter
Neha and son Vikash. Further, Smt. Vimla Devi (mother of the
deceased) was also impleaded as one of the legal heirs of the
MACT No. 450/2018 Nanda Tiwari & Ors. Vs. Hari Om & Anr. Page No. 22 of 37
deceased vide order dated 18.12.2025, pursuant to an application
moved by learned counsel for the claimants. It is further brought
on record that Smt. Nanda Tiwari expired on 11.01.2024 and,
consequently, her name was deleted from the array of parties vide
order dated 22.02.2024 on an application moved by the
claimants. All the aforesaid surviving family members fall within
the category of Class-I legal heirs and there is no dispute
regarding their dependency upon the earnings of the deceased. It
is settled law that dependency is to be determined on the basis of
the status of dependents on the date of accident. Accordingly, all
four surviving family members are treated as dependents and, in
view of the judgment of Sarla Verma (supra), a deduction of
1/4th towards personal and living expenses of the deceased is
considered appropriate where the number of dependents is
between 4 to 6.
Step No- -2 : Ascertainment of Multiplier:
19. In the present case, age of the deceased was about 48 years
of age as per record, thus as tabulated in the case of Sarla Verma
(supra), multiplier of 13 is applicable.
Step No- -3 : Actual Calculation ( actual loss/loss of
dependency):
20 In view of the backdrop of above factual and legal
discussion, the calculation in the present case is as under:
(i). Annual income of the deceased.
(Rs.14,958/- per month x 12) = Rs.1,79,496/-
(ii) Future prospect (25 %) + Rs.44,874/-
------------------
(iii) Total = Rs.2,24,370/-
===========
MACT No. 450/2018 Nanda Tiwari & Ors. Vs. Hari Om & Anr. Page No. 23 of 37
(iv) Deduction for personal expenses
(1/4 of Rs.2,24,370/-) = (-) Rs. 56,092/-
(v) Multiplicand
( Rs.2,24,370/- (-) Rs. 56,092/-) = Rs. 1,68,278/-
(vi) As such, the total loss of dependency is:
Rs. 1,68,278/- ( multiplicand) x 13 (multiplier) = Rs.21,87,614/-
21. Grant of Loss of Estate, Loss Of Consortium And Funeral Expenses:
(a). In respect of above heads, following observations as relevant to the context were made in Pranay Sethi (supra):
''...............46. Another aspect which has created confusion pertains to grant of loss of estate, loss of consortium and funeral expenses.....
.
.
52. As far as the conventional heads are concerned, we find it difficult to agree with the view expressed in Rajesh . It has granted Rs 25,000 towards funeral expenses, Rs 1,00,000 towards loss of consortium and Rs 1,00,000 towards loss of care and guidance for minor children. The head relating to loss of care and minor children does not exist. Though Rajesh refers to Santosh Devi , it does not seem to follow the same. The conventional and traditional heads, needless to say, cannot be determined on percentage basis because that would not be an acceptable criterion. Unlike determination of income, the said heads have to be quantified. Any quantification must have a reasonable foundation. There can be no dispute over the fact that price index, fall in bank interest, escalation of rates in many a field have to be noticed. The court cannot remain oblivious to the same. There has been a thumb rule in this aspect. Otherwise, there will be extreme difficulty in determination of the same and unless the thumb rule is applied, there will be immense variation lacking any kind of consistency as a consequence of which, the orders passed by the tribunals and courts are likely to be unguided. Therefore, we think it seemly to fix reasonable sums.
It seems to us that reasonable figures on conventional heads, namely, loss of estate, loss of consortium and funeral expenses should be Rs 15,000, Rs 40,000 and Rs 15,000 respectively. The principle of revisiting the said heads is an acceptable principle. But the revisit should not be fact-centric or quantum-centric. We think that it would be condign that the amount that we have quantified should be enhanced on percentage basis in every MACT No. 450/2018 Nanda Tiwari & Ors. Vs. Hari Om & Anr. Page No. 24 of 37 three years and the enhancement should be at the rate of 10% in a span of three years. We are disposed to hold so because that will bring in consistency in respect of those heads. .
.
59.8. Reasonable figures on conventional heads, namely, loss of estate, loss of consortium and funeral expenses should be Rs 15,000, Rs 40,000 and Rs 15,000 respectively. The aforesaid amounts should be enhanced at the rate of 10% in every three years...............''
(b). The above reproduced observations entail that Their Lordship in Pranay Sethi (Supra), intended to avoid immense variations and instead ensure consistency in awarding compensation under conventional heads. The claimants are also entitled to certain sums towards grant of loss of estate, loss of consortium and funeral expenses.
(c). Observations made in the case of Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nanu Ram & Ors. (2018) 18 SCC 130, by Hon'ble Supreme Court of India also clarify about compensation as consortium towards/ against death of a dear one:
"This Court interpreted "consortium" to be a compendious term, which encompasses spousal consortium, parental consortium, as well as filial consortium. The right to consortium would include the company, care, help, comfort, guidance, solace and affection of the deceased, which is a loss to his family. With respect to a spouse, it would include sexual relations with the deceased spouse.
Parental consortium is granted to the child upon the premature death of a parent, for loss of parental aid, protection, affection, society, discipline, guidance and training.
Filial consortium is the right of the parents to compensation in the case of an accidental death of a child. An accident leading to the death of a child causes great shock and agony to the parents and family of the deceased. The greatest agony for a parent is to lose their child during their lifetime. Children are valued for their love and affection, and their role in the family unit.
Modern jurisdictions world-over have recognized that the value MACT No. 450/2018 Nanda Tiwari & Ors. Vs. Hari Om & Anr. Page No. 25 of 37 of a child's consortium far exceeds the economic value of the compensation awarded in the case of the death of a child. Most jurisdictions permit parents to be awarded compensation under loss of consortium on the death of a child. The amount awarded to the parents is the compensation for loss of love and affection, care and companionship of the deceased child.
The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 is a beneficial legislation which has been framed with the object of providing relief to the victims, or their families, in cases of genuine claims. In case where a parent has lost their minor child, or unmarried son or daughter, the parents are entitled to be awarded loss of consortium under the head of Filial Consortium.
Parental Consortium is awarded to the children who lose the care and protection of their parents in motor vehicle accidents.
The amount to be awarded for loss consortium will be as per the amount fixed in Pranay Sethi (supra).
At this stage, we consider it necessary to provide uniformity with respect to the grant of consortium, and loss of love and affection. Several Tribunals and High Courts have been awarding compensation for both loss of consortium and loss of love and affection. The Constitution Bench in Pranay Sethi (supra), has recognized only three conventional heads under which compensation can be awarded viz. loss of estate, loss of consortium and funeral expenses.
In Magma General (supra), this Court gave a comprehensive interpretation to consortium to include spousal consortium, parental consortium, as well as filial consortium. Loss of love and affection is comprehended in loss of consortium.
The Tribunals and High Courts are directed to award compensation for loss of consortium, which is a legitimate conventional head. There is no justification to award compensation towards loss of love and affection as a separate head."
(d). Periodic uniform enhancement have also been mandated in case of Pranay Sethi (supra). Thus, applying the criteria, a sum of Rs.18,150/- for cremation expenses; and Rs.18,150/- towards loss of estate is also payable.
(e). The deceased is survived by wife, mother and two children MACT No. 450/2018 Nanda Tiwari & Ors. Vs. Hari Om & Anr. Page No. 26 of 37 all of who are further entitled to Rs.48,400/- towards loss of consortium.
22. Total Award Amount
(a) Thus the total award amount comes to Rs.21,87,614/- (+) Rs 18,150/- ( Loss to estate) + Rs. 18,150/-( funeral expenses) + Rs.1,93,600/- (loss of consortium) = Rs.24,17,514/-.
23. Interest:
(a) It is settled that any fixed rate of interest cannot be prescribed for all cases at all times and would largely depend upon the prevailing rate of interest as per the applicable guidelines. As such, interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum is deemed fit and accordingly granted in the present case. (Reliance placed upon National Insurance Company Ltd Vs. Yad Ram MAC APP 526/2018 also referred and relied in case of The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd Vs. Sohan Lal & Ors. MAC APP 70/2024 of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court).
24. Liability:-
(a) Counsel for R-2 / Insurance Company has contended that the offending vehicle was being plied without a valid and effective driving licence and that the driver of the offending vehicle was also in an inebriated condition, which fact, according to her, stands substantiated from the investigation. It is argued that the driver was consequently charge-sheeted under Section 3/181 of the Motor Vehicles Act for driving a vehicle without a valid driving licence and under Section 185 of the Motor Vehicles Act for driving under the influence of alcohol. It is further contended that since the driver himself was also the owner of the offending vehicle, there is a clear violation of the terms and conditions of the insurance policy. On the strength of MACT No. 450/2018 Nanda Tiwari & Ors. Vs. Hari Om & Anr. Page No. 27 of 37 the charge-sheet, it is argued that the insurance company is not liable to indemnify the insured. Reliance has also been placed upon the judgment in Indraprastha Logistics (supra) to seek recovery rights on the ground of alleged drunken driving.
(b) Per contra, the driver of the offending vehicle entered the witness box as R1W1 and produced his driving licence, which has been exhibited as Ex. R1W1/2. The particulars of the said driving licence reveal that it was valid and effective for driving the class of vehicle involved in the accident. Counsel for the insurance company objected to the said driving licence on the ground that it is a procured document, allegedly prepared on false particulars at a belated stage of investigation only to escape liability. It was further argued that the driver did not possess any valid driving licence at the time of the accident. Doubt was also raised on the ground that the driving licence had been issued by the Transport Authority of Manipur, whereas the driver admittedly belongs to Uttar Pradesh and was allegedly residing in Faridabad at the time of the accident.
(c) During cross-examination, several questions were put to R1W1 arising out of the suspicion regarding the authenticity of the driving licence. The witness / driver Hari Om stated that he had stayed in Manipur for about seven months, though he could not specify the exact period or address. He admitted that he had not brought any documentary proof to show his residence in Manipur. He further stated that he had gone to Manipur in the year 2015, but could not recall the exact date and the name of train. He denied the suggestion that he had never visited Manipur or that Ex. R1W1/2 is a forged, fabricated or procured document.
He also stated that the Investigating Officer never asked him to MACT No. 450/2018 Nanda Tiwari & Ors. Vs. Hari Om & Anr. Page No. 28 of 37 produce his driving licence. He specifically denied that he was under the influence of alcohol at the time of the accident and clarified that the driving licence was issued in the year 2016.
(d) The insurance company, during arguments, vaguely submitted that it could not get the driving licence verified through its own investigator due to alleged security issues in Manipur. Perusal of the record shows that a verification report was called by the police authorities from the Transport Department, Manipur, and the same has been placed on record. The said verification report unequivocally authenticates the driving licence in question, mentioning its date of issue as 14.04.2016 and validity up to 17.02.2035 for the relevant category of vehicle. The report also reflects the address of the driver as Khergao Awang Leikai, Imphal East, Manipur.
(e) It is pertinent to note that there is no statutory bar under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, which prohibits a person from obtaining a driving licence from a State other than his native State or permanent place of residence, provided the licence is issued by a competent licensing authority. Mere suspicion regarding the place of issuance of a driving licence, in the absence of any concrete evidence of forgery or fabrication, cannot be a ground to disbelieve a public document duly verified by a government authority. The insurance company has neither summoned any official from the Transport Department of Manipur nor led any independent evidence to rebut the verification report or to establish that the driving licence is fake or invalid.
(f) Once the driving licence has been verified and MACT No. 450/2018 Nanda Tiwari & Ors. Vs. Hari Om & Anr. Page No. 29 of 37 authenticated by the concerned Transport Authority, the burden squarely lay upon the insurance company to prove the alleged breach of policy conditions, which it has failed to discharge. Bald allegations, conjectures and doubts cannot take the place of proof.
(g) In view of the above discussion, this Tribunal finds no material on record to discredit or disbelieve the driving licence Ex. R1W1/2. Accordingly, the driving licence of the driver is held to be valid and effective on the date of the accident, and the plea of the insurance company that the driver was not holding a valid driving licence is hereby rejected.
(h) Another plea raised by the insurance company is that the driver of the offending vehicle was under the influence of alcohol at the time of the accident and, on that basis, he was charge- sheeted under Section 185 of the Motor Vehicles Act for driving in an inebriated condition.
(i) As per the charge-sheet, the police authorities are stated to have recovered one whisky bottle of the brand "Signature" from the co-driver seat of the offending vehicle. The MLC of the driver, Hari Om, also records the remark "smell of alcohol", which appears to have formed the basis for invoking the said penal provision. However, it is important to note that beyond these observations, no scientific or medical evidence has been brought on record to establish that the driver had consumed alcohol beyond the permissible limit prescribed under law. Despite repeated directions, no FSL report or blood alcohol analysis has been filed by the investigating agency to indicate the actual alcohol content in the driver's blood at the relevant time.
MACT No. 450/2018 Nanda Tiwari & Ors. Vs. Hari Om & Anr. Page No. 30 of 37 The distinction is material. Mere presence of a liquor bottle in the vehicle or a general observation of "smell of alcohol" in the MLC, by itself, does not conclusively establish the offence under Section 185 of the Motor Vehicles Act, unless it is supported by evidence showing that the alcohol level exceeded the statutory limit.
(j) The judgments relied upon by the insurance company, as already discussed, proceed on the footing of a clearly established breach of permissible alcohol limits, supported by cogent medical or scientific evidence. In the present case, such foundational evidence is conspicuously absent. The record contains no material, except the MLC noting "smell of alcohol", which falls short of the legal requirement to prove intoxication in terms of Section 185 of the Motor Vehicles Act.
(k) In these circumstances, the plea raised by the insurance company rests more on assumption than proof. In the absence of any reliable and documented evidence demonstrating that the driver was driving under the influence of alcohol beyond the permissible limit, this contention cannot be accepted and is, accordingly, rejected.
(l) Insurance Company has conceded valid and effective Insurance Policy on the date of accident. It has already been held that accident occurred on account of speedy and rash driving of offending vehicle. It is settled that Insurance Company is responsible to indemnify owner / insured for vicarious liability incurred by tort feaser. Therefore, such principal award amount/compensation will be payable by the insurance company of offending vehicle with simple interest @ 7.5% p.a. from the MACT No. 450/2018 Nanda Tiwari & Ors. Vs. Hari Om & Anr. Page No. 31 of 37 date of filing of petition till actual realization. (If there is any order regarding excluding of interest for specific period same be complied at the time of calculation of award amount. Further, in case the matter adjourned sine die, interest for the period i.e. the date of concerned order till revival of the case, shall not be awarded. Further, if any auction proceeds is received, same be adjusted in the final award amount).
25. The award amount shall be deposited by the Insurance Company. Counsel for the Insurance Company is also directed to furnish the complete case details, including the MACT case number, CNR number, FIR number, name of Police Station, name of the deceased/claimant(s), date of accident, and any other relevant particulars, to the State Bank of India, Saket Court Branch, New Delhi at the time of getting the amount deposited. The amount shall be deposited through RTGS/NEFT/IMPS in the account titled "MACT FUND PARKING", Account No. 00000042706870765, IFSC Code SBIN0014244, MICR Code 110002342, under intimation to the Nazir of this Tribunal.
26. Release of Award Amount/ Disbursement
(a) Share of Petitioner No. 2/ Neha Tiwari (daughter of deceased) : Rs.10,00,000/- along with proportionate interest is awarded to daughter of deceased out of which Rs.8,00,000/- is further kept in monthly FDR of Rs.10,000/- per month. Remaining amount is directed to be released in her bank account.
(b) Share of Petitioner No. 3/ Abhay Tiwari (son of deceased) : Rs.10,00,000/- along with proportionate interest is awarded to son of deceased out of which Rs.8,00,000/- is further MACT No. 450/2018 Nanda Tiwari & Ors. Vs. Hari Om & Anr. Page No. 32 of 37 kept in monthly FDR of Rs.10,000/- per month. Remaining amount is directed to be released in his bank account.
(c) Share of petitioner no.4/ mother of deceased: Out of total award amount, Rs.4,17,514/- along with proportionate interest is awarded to mother of deceased and whole amount is directed to be released in her bank account.
27. In terms of the Practice Directions issued by Hon'ble High Court, vide reference no. 134/Rules/DHC, dated 14.05.2025, the claimant (s) are directed to produce their bank account details along with either a certificate of the banker giving all details of the bank account of the person or persons entitled to receive the compensation including IFS Code, or a copy of cancelled cheque of the bank account to this Tribunal with seven days of the date of Award, if not already placed on record. They are also directed to file their Aadhar Card and PAN Card if not already filed.
28 Directions to the Branch Manager, SBI, Saket Court Complex
(a) The Manager, SBI, Saket Court Complex, is further directed to verify the documents and details submitted by the claimant pertaining to their bank account, and upon proper verification, under certification of the Branch Manager (of the bank whose details have been provided by the claimant for release of the compensation amount) disburse the amount, directed to be released to the claimant, directly into the verified bank account of the claimant under notice to the Tribunal.
29. Directions with respect to Fixed Deposit:
(a) As per Practice Directions, Hon'ble High Court, vide reference no.
134/Rules/DHC, dated 14.05.2025, the bank shall invest the amount MACT No. 450/2018 Nanda Tiwari & Ors. Vs. Hari Om & Anr. Page No. 33 of 37 to be deposited in fixed deposit with any nationalised bank and fixed deposit shall be with the standing instructions to the bank to renew the same after periodical intervals till further orders are passed by the Tribunal.
(b) The Bank shall not permit any joint name (s) to be added in the savings bank account or fixed deposit accounts of victim i.e. the savings bank account of the claimant shall be individual savings bank account and not a joint account.
(c) The original fixed deposit shall be retained by the bank in safe custody. However, the statement containing FDR number, FDR amount, date of maturity and maturity amount shall be furnished by bank to the claimant.
(d) The monthly interest be credited by Electronic Clearing System (ECS) in the savings bank account of the claimant near the place of their residence.
(e) The maturity amounts of the FDR (s) be credited by Electronic Clearing System (ECS) in the savings bank account of the claimant near the place of their residence.
(f) No loan, advance or withdrawal or pre-mature discharge be allowed on the fixed deposits without permission of the Court.
(g) The concerned bank shall not issue any cheque book and/ or debit card to claimant (s). However, in case the debit card and/ or cheque book have already been issued, bank shall cancel the same before the disbursement of the award amount. The bank shall debit freeze the account of the claimant so that no debit card be issued in respect of the account of the claimant from any other branch of the bank.
(h) The bank shall make an endorsement on the passbook of the claimant to the effect, that no cheque book and / or debit card have been issued and shall not be issued without the permission of the Court and claimant shall produce the passbook with the necessary endorsement before the Court on the next date fixed for compliance.
30. SUMMARY OF COMPUTATION OF AWARD IN DEATH CASES TO BE INCORPORATED IN THE AWARD.
1. Date of accident 13/14.02.2018
2. Name of deceased Triyugi Nath Tiwari MACT No. 450/2018 Nanda Tiwari & Ors. Vs. Hari Om & Anr. Page No. 34 of 37
3. Age of the deceased 48 years
4. Occupation of the deceased Not proved
5. Income of the deceased As per record
31. Name, age and relationship of legal representative of deceased:
1. Neha Tiwari (daughter of deceased)
2. Abhay (son of deceased)
3. Vimla Devi (mother of deceased)
32. Computation of compensation:-
S. No. Heads Awarded by the Claims Tribunal 1 A. Income of the deceased per year (As Rs.1,79,496/- per Minimum Wages) B. Add-Future Prospects 25% Rs.44,874/- C. Total (A+B) Rs.2,24,370/- D Deduction 1/4 Rs.56,092/- E. Multiplicand (C-D) Rs.1,68,278/- F. Multiplier 13 G. Total Loss of Dependency Rs.21,87,614/- 2 Compensation for loss of consortium Rs.1,93,600/- 3 Compensation for loss of estate Rs. 18,150/- 4 Compensation towards funeral expenses Rs. 18,150/-/- 5 TOTAL COMPENSATION Rs.24,17,514/- 6 O. RATE OF INTEREST AWARDED: @ 7.5% per annum 7 Award amount kept in FDRs Rs.16,00,000/- 8 Award amount released Rs.8,17,514/- MACT No. 450/2018 Nanda Tiwari & Ors. Vs. Hari Om & Anr. Page No. 35 of 37 9 Mode of disbursement of the award (a) Share of Petitioner amount to the claimant (s). (Clause 29) No. 2/ Neha Tiwari (daughter of deceased) : Rs.10,00,000/- along with proportionate interest is awarded to daughter of deceased out of which Rs.8,00,000/- is further kept in monthly FDR of Rs.10,000/- per month. Remaining amount is directed to be released in her bank account. (b) Share of Petitioner No. 3/ Abhay Tiwari (son of deceased) : Rs.10,00,000/- along with proportionate interest is awarded to son of deceased out of which Rs.8,00,000/- is further kept in monthly FDR of Rs.10,000/- per month. Remaining amount is directed to be released in his bank account. (c) Share of petitioner no.4/ mother of deceased: MACT No. 450/2018 Nanda Tiwari & Ors. Vs. Hari Om & Anr. Page No. 36 of 37 Out of total award amount, Rs.4,17,514/- along with proportionate interest is awarded to mother of deceased and whole amount is directed to be released in her bank account. 10 Next Date for reporting of compliance of 20.01.2026 the award (Clause 31)
33. Copy of this award be given to the parties free of cost. The copy of award be sent to the Ld. Secretary DLSA and concerned criminal court.
Digitally signed ADITI by ADITI GARG
Date:
(Pronounced in the
open court on 20.12.2025)
GARG 2025.12.20
17:11:10 +0530
(Aditi Garg)
PO-MACT-01 (South-East)
Saket Court/ New Delhi
20.12.2025
MACT No. 450/2018 Nanda Tiwari & Ors. Vs. Hari Om & Anr. Page No. 37 of 37