Delhi District Court
Ajay Kumar (I) (Fir ... vs Anil Kumar (Go Digit) on 21 February, 2026
IN THE TRIBUNAL OF PRESIDING OFFICER MACT-02:
CENTRAL DISTRICT:
TIS HAZARI DISTRICT COURTS: DELHI.
PRESIDED OVER BY Ms. POOJA AGGARWAL, DHJS
MACT No. 606/24
CNR/UID No. DLCT-01-012546-2024
In Respect of:
FIR No. 398/2024
PS Wazirabad
U/s 279/338 IPC
Ajay Kumar (Injured)
S/o Sh. Vikram Singh,
R/o H. No. B-222, Block B,
Street No. 11, Bhajanpura,
Delhi-110053.
(Through Ld. Counsel Sh. Akhilesh Kumar)
...........Petitioner
VERSUS
1. Anil Kumar (Driver-cum-owner)
S/o Mr. Ram Saroop,
R/o H. No. 938, Gali No. 20,
Shiv Mandir, Wazirabad, Delhi.
(Through Ld. Counsel Ms. Reena Luka)
2. Go Digit General Insurance Limited (Insurer)
Third Floor, Harsh Bhawan,
Nehru Place, New Delhi.
(Through Ld. Counsel Sh. Manjul Awasthi)
.....Respondents
Date of filing of DAR : 13.08.2024
Judgment reserved on : 19.02.2026
Date of award : 21.02.2026
Digitally signed
MACT No. 606/24 by POOJA
In Respect of FIR No. 398/24 PS Wazirabad POOJA AGGARWAL Page No. 1 of 34
Ajay Kumar v. Anil Kumar & Ors. AGGARWAL Date: 2026.02.21
13:00:55 +0530
AWARD/JUDGMENT
1. The present Detailed Accident Report (hereinafter referred to as
'DAR') has been filed by the Investigating Officer in respect of
FIR No. 398/2024, PS Wazirabad, u/s 279/337 IPC regarding
injuries sustained by Sh. Ajay Kumar S/o Vikram Singh
(hereinafter referred to as "Petitioner/ injured") due to an
accident which took place on 24.04.2024, at about 10.00 pm, by
the vehicle bearing registration no. DL-5SCA-7918 (hereinafter
referred to as 'Offending Vehicle') being owned and driven by
Mr. Anil Kumar (hereinafter referred to as "Respondent No.1")
rashly and negligently and insured with Go Digit General
Insurance limited (hereinafter referred to as "Respondent No.
2"). The copy of the chargesheet filed in respect of the
commission of offences under Section 279/338 IPC against the
Respondent No.1 after investigation in respect of the said FIR,
was also annexed with the DAR.
2. Vide order dated 13.08.2024, passed by the Ld. Predecessor, the
DAR was directed to be treated as a claim petition under Section
166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as
'MV Act').
Brief Facts as per the Reply of Respondent No. 1
3. In his reply to the DAR, the Respondent No. 1 stated that there was delay in the registration of FIR and that he was not present with his motorcycle at the place of incident on 24.04.2024, at around 10.00 p.m., nor he was involved in any accident.
Digitally signed by POOJA MACT No. 606/24 POOJA AGGARWAL
In Respect of FIR No. 398/24 PS Wazirabad AGGARWAL Date: Page No. 2 of 34
Ajay Kumar v. Anil Kumar & Ors. 2026.02.21
13:01:01 +0530
Brief Facts as per the reply filed by Respondent No. 2/ Insurance Company.
4. In its reply, the Respondent No. 2/ Insurance Company stated that the offending vehicle No. DL-5CA-7918 was insured with it for the period w.e.f. 10.11.2023 to 09.11.2024. It also stated that there was delay in the registration of FIR which had not been explained and there were no eye witnesses or CCTV cameras on the basis of which it could be held that the accident was caused due to Respondent No. 1 and it appeared that his vehicle had been falsely implicated.
Issues
5. From the pleadings on record, the following issues were framed by the Ld. Predecessor vide order dated 22.07.2025:-
1.Whether the petitioner Ajay Kumar suffered injuries in an accident that took place on 25.04.2024 at about 10.00 PM, involving vehicle bearing registration No. DL-5SCA-7918 driven rashly and negligently and owned by Respondent No. 1 and insured with the respondent no.2? OPP.
2.Whether the petitioner is entitled for compensation? If so, to what amount and from whom?
3.Relief.
Evidence of the Petitioner
6. PW-1/Petitioner Ajay Kumar tendered his evidence by way of affidavit i.e. Ex. PW1/A testifying that on 24.04.2024, he was coming from Mukundpur and when he was crossing the Burari flyover, at the end point of the flyover, the Respondent No. 1, who was driving the offending vehicle bearing registration No. DL-5SCA-7918 in a rash and negligent manner and fast speed, hit his motorcycle from behind due to which he received Digitally signed MACT No. 606/24 by POOJA In Respect of FIR No. 398/24 PS Wazirabad POOJA AGGARWAL Page No. 3 of 34 Ajay Kumar v. Anil Kumar & Ors. AGGARWAL Date:
2026.02.21 13:01:06 +0530 grievous injuries and iron rod was installed in his left arm on 01.05.2024 during treatment at Sushruta Trauma Center. He also testified that he sustained 06% disability in working capacity due to the accident and being a practicing advocate, he was earning ₹40,000/- per month.
7. The Petitioner/PW1 also relied upon the following documents :-
S.No Description of Documents Exhibit/Mark
1. Copy of his Aadhar card Ex.PW1/B
2. Copy of registration certificate Ex.PW1/C of offending vehicle
3. Copy of FIR Ex.PW1/D
4. Copy of chargesheet Ex.PW1/E
5. Copy of MLC Ex.PW1/F
6. Copy of site plan Ex. PW1/G
7. Copy of X-ray report Ex. PW1/H
8. Copy of registration certificate Ex. PW1/I of his bike
9. The disability certificate Ex. PW1/J
10. Copy of his ITRs for AY 2023- Ex. PW1/K 24 and 2024-25
8. He was duly cross-examined by the Ld. Counsel for the Respondents No. 2 and the cross-examination was adopted on behalf of Respondent No. 1 as well.
Evidence of the Respondents
9. The Respondent No. 1 examined himself as R1W1 and tendered his evidence by way of affidavit i.e. Ex R1W1/A, inter-alia, testifying that he had been falsely implicated in the case and that his motorcycle was not involved in the accident nor he caused MACT No. 606/24 Digitally signed by POOJA In Respect of FIR No. 398/24 PS Wazirabad POOJA AGGARWAL Page No. 4 of 34 Ajay Kumar v. Anil Kumar & Ors. AGGARWAL Date: 2026.02.21 13:01:11 +0530 the accident. He further testified that it was the Petitioner himself who had caused the accident by driving his motorcycle in a rash and negligent manner and had fallen on the road. He also testified as to his vehicle being insured with Respondent No. 2 from 10.11.2023 to 09.11.2024. R1W1/Respondent No.1 also relied upon the following documents :-
S.No Description of Documents Exhibit/Mark
1. Copy of his Aadhar card Ex.RW1/1
2. Copy of registration Ex.RW1/2 certificate of his motorcycle
3. Copy of insurance policy Ex.RW1/3
4. Copy of his driving license Ex.PW1/4
10. He was duly cross-examined on behalf of the Petitioner.
11.The Respondent No. 2/ Insurance Company chose not to lead any evidence.
Final Arguments and Issue Wise Findings
12. Final arguments were advanced on behalf of the Petitioner and the Respondents by their respective counsels.
13. Thereafter, it was noted that the date of accident had been wrongly mentioned in the issues as framed and the same was corrected vide order dated 19.02.2026, whereafter the parties chose not to lead any further evidence.
14. The amended issue no. 1 was framed as under:
1. Whether the petitioner Ajay Kumar suffered injuries in an accident that took place on 24.04.2024 at about 10.00 Digitally signed MACT No. 606/24 by POOJA In Respect of FIR No. 398/24 PS Wazirabad POOJA AGGARWAL Page No. 5 of 34 Ajay Kumar v. Anil Kumar & Ors. AGGARWAL Date:
2026.02.21 13:01:16 +0530 PM, involving vehicle bearing registration No. DL-5SCA-7918 driven rashly and negligently and owned by the Respondent No. 1 and insured with the respondent no. 2? OPP.
15. The final arguments, as advanced have been carefully considered along with the evidence on record. After careful consideration of the entire evidence, the issue wise findings are as under:
Amended / corrected Issue No.1: Whether the petitioner Ajay Kumar suffered injuries in an accident that took place on 24.04.2024 at about 10.00 PM, involving vehicle bearing registration No. DL-5SCA-7918 driven rashly and negligently and owned by Respondent No. 1 and insured with the respondent no.2? OPP.
16. The onus to prove this issue was upon the Petitioner. It is a settled proposition of law that in this Tribunal strict proof of an accident having been caused in a particular manner may not be possible to be done by the petitioners, and they are to establish their case on the touchstone of preponderance of probability and the standard of proof beyond reasonable doubt cannot be applied. Strength for this interpretation is drawn from the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Bimla Devi and others Vs. Himachal Road Transport Corporation and others, (2009) 13 SC 530, also reiterated in various subsequent judgments including Mangla Ram Vs. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. & Ors., (2018) 5 SCC 656, Geeta Dubey Vs United India Insurance Company Ltd. & Ors, 2024 SCC Online SC 3779 and Sajeena Ikhbal and Others Vs Mini Babu George and Others, 2024 SCC OnLine SC 2883.
Digitally signed MACT No. 606/24 by POOJA
POOJA AGGARWAL
In Respect of FIR No. 398/24 PS Wazirabad Page No. 6 of 34
AGGARWAL Date:
Ajay Kumar v. Anil Kumar & Ors. 2026.02.21
13:01:21 +0530
17. In Prabhavathi v. Bangalore Metropolitan Transport Corpn., 2025 SCC OnLine SC 455, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has again reiterated that:
"13. It is the settled law that under the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 it is established that in compensation cases, the strict rules of evidence used in criminal trials do not apply. Instead, the standard of proof is based on the preponderance of probability. This Court in Sunita v. Rajasthan SRTC1 observed that:
"22. It is thus well settled that in motor accident claim cases, once the foundational fact, namely, the actual occurrence of the accident, has been established, then the Tribunal's role would be to calculate the quantum of just compensation if the accident had taken place by reason of negligence of the driver of a motor vehicle and, while doing so, the Tribunal would not be strictly bound by the pleadings of the parties. Notably, while deciding cases arising out of motor vehicle accidents, the standard of proof to be borne in mind must be of preponderance of probability and not the strict standard of proof beyond all reasonable doubt which is followed in criminal cases."
The exposition came to be reiterated in Rajwati alias Rajjo v. United India Insurance Company Ltd.2, wherein it was observed that:
"20. It is well settled that Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 is a beneficial piece of legislation and as such, while dealing with compensation cases, once the actual occurrence of the accident has been established, the Tribunal's role would be to award just and fair compensation. As held by this Court in Sunita (Supra) and Kusum Lata(Supra), strict rules of evidence as applicable in a criminal trial, are not applicable in motor accident compensation cases, i.e., to say, "the standard of proof to be borne in mind must be of preponderance of probability and not the strict standard of proof beyond all reasonable doubt which is followed in criminal cases".
(Emphasis supplied)
18. As per the testimony of Petitioner/PW-1, the accident had occurred on 24.04.2024, when his bike was hit from behind by the offending vehicle, which was being driven by the Respondent No. 1 in a rash and negligent manner and at a very 1(2020) 13 SCC 486 2 2022 SCC OnLine SC 1699 Digitally signed MACT No. 606/24 by POOJA POOJA AGGARWAL In Respect of FIR No. 398/24 PS Wazirabad Ajay Kumar v. Anil Kumar & Ors. AGGARWAL Date: 2026.02.21 Page No. 7 of 34 13:01:25 +0530 fast speed. Nothing material could be elicited during his cross- examination as he withstood the rigors of the same.
19. Though, the factum of there being an accident between the vehicle of the injured and the offending vehicle being driven by the Respondent No.1 was initially denied by the Respondent No.1 in his reply/written statement, however, during his cross- examination, the Respondent No.1 himself testified that his testimony in the affidavit from portion A to A1 i.e. as to "The motorcycle bearing No. DL-5CA-7918 was not involved in the alleged accident in question" was incorrect. He also admitted that he had not filed any GPS receipt, toll receipt or call record in respect of the whereabout of his vehicle at the time of the accident nor he had disclosed the name of any person who could prove that his vehicle was not involved in the accident.
20. It is not in dispute that in respect of the accident in question, the Respondent No. 1 was charge-sheeted by the investigating agency for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 279/338 IPC in respect of FIR No.398/2024, PS Wazirabad, after concluding its investigation on the aspect of manner of the accident as well as the identity of the offender.
21. After initially having denied the very involvement of his vehicle in the accident in the reply/written statement, the Respondent No. 1, being the driver of the offending vehicle testified in his evidence affidavit that he had not caused the accident which was caused by the Petitioner himself, who was driving his motorcycle in a rash and negligent manner. This MACT No. 606/24 Digitally signed In Respect of FIR No. 398/24 PS Wazirabad by POOJA Page No. 8 of 34 POOJA AGGARWAL Ajay Kumar v. Anil Kumar & Ors.
AGGARWAL Date: 2026.02.21 13:01:31 +0530 testimony proves that the Respondent No.1 admitted the factum of involvement of his vehicle in the accident, though he disputed the existence of rashness/negligence on his part.
22. In his cross-examination, the Respondent No.1 went on to testify that the accident had occurred when he was coming from Burari and the Petitioner was ahead of him, and when he tried to overtake him from the right side, he had come towards his right resulting in the accident. However, except the said self serving testimony, the Respondent No.1 did not lead any further evidence to prove the manner of the accident.
23. Rather, the Respondent No.1 has admitted in his cross- examination that he had not made any call to the PCR after the accident nor he had filed any application for quashing of the FIR pertaining to the accident. The said inaction of the Respondent No.1 as well as the fact that the filing of the chargesheet against the Respondent No.1 indicates existence of rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle by the Respondent No. 1, even more so, as the Respondent No.1 has failed to bring on record the existence of any reason for false implication of the offending vehicle nor any evidence has been led to believe that the accident did not take place due to the rash and negligent driving of Respondent No.1. Strength for this interpretation is drawn from the judgement of National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pushpa Rana, 2009 ACJ 287 and United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Deepak Goel & Ors, 2014 (2) TAC 846 (Del) wherein the Coordinate Bench of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court, held as under:-
Digitally signedby POOJA MACT No. 606/24 POOJA AGGARWAL In Respect of FIR No. 398/24 PS Wazirabad AGGARWAL Date: 2026.02.21 Page No. 9 of 34 Ajay Kumar v. Anil Kumar & Ors. 13:01:36 +0530 "......where the claimants filed either the certified copies of the criminal record or the criminal record showing the completion of investigation by police or issuance of charge sheet under Section 279/304A IPC or the certified copy of FIR or the recovery of the mechanical inspection report of the offending vehicle, then these documents are sufficient proof to reach to a conclusion that the driver was negligent particularly when there is no defence available from the side of driver."
(Emphasis supplied)
24. Further, considering that the Petitioner cannot be expected to prove the accident beyond reasonable doubts and the principle of res ipse loquitor i.e. "accident speaks for itself" is applicable, it would imply that once it has been established in DAR and chargesheet that the accident had taken place, the burden shifts on the Respondents to prove that they were not responsible for the accident which the Respondents have failed to discharge.
25. Thus, in view of the aforesaid reasons and discussion, in view of the evidence as led including the chargesheet, as well as oral testimony of PW-1 who is an eye-witness of the accident being the injured himself, and in the absence of any evidence depicting any negligent/ sudden act or omission on the part of injured having been brought on record, it is held that on the scale of preponderance of probability, the Petitioner has discharged his burden and has proved that an accident that took place on 24.04.2024, at about 10.00 PM, involving vehicle bearing registration No. DL-5SCA-7918, owned and driven by the Respondent No. 1 rashly and negligently, and insured with the Respondent No. 2/ insurance company.
[[
MACT No. 606/24 Digitally signed by
In Respect of FIR No. 398/24 PS Wazirabad POOJA POOJA AGGARWAL Page No. 10 of 34 Ajay Kumar v. Anil Kumar & Ors. AGGARWAL Date: 2026.02.21 13:01:42 +0530 Injury
26. In respect of the injury sustained by the Petitioner in the accident, as per the MLC No. 925/24, dated 24.04.2024 of the Petitioner prepared at Lok Nayak Hospital, i.e. Ex PW1/F, the Petitioner sustained various injuries including tenderness, crepitus, deformity at left arm and elbow in a road traffic accident as per the alleged history, and the nature of injury has been opined to be grievous.
27. Even the discharge summary issued by Sushruta Trauma Centre reflects the Petitioner to have remained admitted there from 30.04.2024 to 03.05.2024 due to the injuries including fracture of humerus and 1/3rd shaft, which also corroborates the factum of grievous injuries having been sustained by the Petitioner due to the accident.
28. Even as per the disability certificate dated 27.02.2025 issued by Aruna Asaf Ali Hospital i.e. Ex PW1/J, the petitioner has 06% permanent physical impairment in relation to his left upper limb, which is non-progressive and not likely to improve.
29. No reason has been brought on record to disbelieve either the MLC or even the discharge summary, as well as the disability certificate, which on the scale of preponderance of probabilities, sufficiently proves that the accident in question resulted in grievous injury to the Petitioner.
30. Issue no.1 is, thus, decided in favour of the Petitioner and against the Respondents.
Digitally signed by POOJA MACT No. 606/24 POOJA AGGARWAL
In Respect of FIR No. 398/24 PS Wazirabad AGGARWAL Date: Page No. 11 of 34
2026.02.21
Ajay Kumar v. Anil Kumar & Ors. 13:01:48 +0530
Issue no 2.Whether the petitioner is entitled for compensation? If so, to what amount and from whom? and Issue no. 3.Relief.
31. Since the Petitioner sustained grievous injuries as a result of the accident in question, he is entitled to be compensated for the same and Section 168 of the MV Act enjoins upon this Tribunal to hold an inquiry into the claim to make an award determining the amount of compensation which appears to it to be just and reasonable.
Quantum of compensation
32. The guiding principles for assessment of "just and reasonable compensation" have been enumerated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, in Anjali v. Lokendra Rathod, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 1683, wherein it has been observed that: -
"The provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short, "MV Act") gives paramount importance to the concept of 'just and fair' compensation. It is a beneficial legislation which has been framed with the object of providing relief to the victims or their families. Section 168 of the MV Act deals with the concept of 'just compensation' which ought to be determined on the foundation of fairness, reasonableness and equitability. Although such determination can never be arithmetically exact or perfect, an endeavor should be made by the Court to award just and fair compensation irrespective of the amount claimed by the applicant/s. In Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transport Corporation, (2009) 6 SCC 121, this Court has laid down as under:
16."Just compensation" is adequate compensation which is fair and equitable, on the facts and circumstances of the case, to make good the loss suffered as a result of the wrong, as far as money can do so, by applying the well settled principles relating to award of compensation. It is not intended to be a bonanza, largesse or source of profit."
(Emphasis supplied) Digitally signed by POOJA POOJA AGGARWAL MACT No. 606/24 AGGARWAL Date:
2026.02.21 In Respect of FIR No. 398/24 PS Wazirabad 13:03:11 +0530 Page No. 12 of 34 Ajay Kumar v. Anil Kumar & Ors.
33. It is a settled proposition of law that in cases where the petitioner has suffered injuries due to the accident, the grant of compensation is under two broad categories, i.e. Pecuniary as well as non-pecuniary damages. The two categories of damages has been explained by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in R.D. Hattangadi v. Pest Control (India) (P) Ltd., (1995) 1 SCC 551, which has also been reiterated in Atul Tiwari v. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., (2025) 3 SCC 6 as under:
"9. Broadly speaking 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. 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."
(Emphasis supplied)
34. The principles guiding such grant of compensation have been reiterated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Raj Kumar Vs. Ajay Kumar & Ors. (2011) 1 SCC 34, as under:
"General principles relating to compensation in injury cases
5. The provision of The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (`Act' for short) makes it clear that the award must be just, which means that compensation should, to the extent possible, fully and adequately restore the claimant to the position prior to the accident. The object of awarding damages is to make good the loss suffered as a result of wrong done as far as money can do so, in a fair, reasonable and equitable manner. The Court or tribunal shall have to assess the damages objectively and exclude from consideration any speculation or fancy, though some conjecture with reference to the MACT No. 606/24 In Respect of FIR No. 398/24 PS Wazirabad Digitally signed Page No. 13 of 34 by POOJA Ajay Kumar v. Anil Kumar & Ors. POOJA AGGARWAL AGGARWAL Date: 2026.02.21 13:03:17 +0530 nature of disability and its consequences, is inevitable. A person is not only to be compensated for the physical injury, but also for the loss which he suffered as a result of such injury. This means that he is to be compensated for his inability to lead a full life, his inability to enjoy those normal amenities which he would have enjoyed but for the injuries, and his inability to earn as much as he used to earn or could have earned. (See C. K. Subramonia Iyer vs. T. Kunhikuttan Nair - AIR 1970 SC 376, R. D. Hattangadi Vs. Pest Control (India) Ltd. - 1995 (1) SCC 551 and Baker vs. Willoughby
- 1970 AC 467).
6. The heads under which compensation is awarded in personal injury cases are the following :
Pecuniary damages (Special Damages)
(i) Expenses relating to treatment, hospitalization, medicines, transportation, nourishing food, and miscellaneous expenditure.
(ii) Loss of earnings (and other gains) which the injured would have made had he not been injured, comprising:
(a) Loss of earning during the period of treatment;
(b) Loss of future earnings on account of permanent disability.
(iii) Future medical expenses.
Non-pecuniary damages (General Damages)
(iv) Damages for pain, suffering and trauma as a consequence of the injuries.
(v) Loss of amenities (and/or loss of prospects of marriage).
(vi) Loss of expectation of life (shortening of normal longevity).
In routine personal injury cases, compensation will be awarded only under heads (i), (ii)(a) and (iv). It is only in serious cases of injury, where there is specific medical evidence corroborating the evidence of the claimant, that compensation will be granted under any of the heads (ii)(b), (iii), (v) and (vi) relating to loss of future earnings on account of permanent disability, future medical expenses, loss of amenities (and/or loss of prospects of marriage) and loss of expectation of life."
(Emphasis supplied)
35. Further in Kajal v. Jagdish Chand, (2020) 4 SCC 413, it has been held that:
"It is impossible to equate human suffering and personal deprivation with money. However, this is what the Act enjoins upon the courts to do. The court has to make a judicious attempt to award damages, so as to compensate the claimant for the loss suffered by the victim. On the one hand, the compensation should not be assessed very conservatively, but on the other hand, compensation should also not be assessed in so liberal a fashion so as to make it a bounty to the claimant. The court while assessing the compensation should have regard to the degree of deprivation and the loss caused by such deprivation. Such compensation is what is termed as just compensation. The compensation or damages Digitally signed MACT No. 606/24 by POOJA In Respect of FIR No. 398/24 PS Wazirabad POOJA AGGARWAL Page No. 14 of 34 Ajay Kumar v. Anil Kumar & Ors. AGGARWAL Date: 2026.02.21 13:03:25 +0530 assessed for personal injuries should be substantial to compensate the injured for the deprivation suffered by the injured throughout his/her life. They should not be just token damages."
(Emphasis supplied)
36. In view of the above legal propositions, the amount of compensation shall be computed in this case.
A: Pecuniary damages (Special Damages)
(i) Expenses relating to treatment, hospitalization, medicines, transportation, nourishing food, and miscellaneous expenditure.
37. In respect of his treatment/ medicine and hospitalization, the Petitioner has nowhere testified either in his evidence affidavit i.e. Ex PW1/A or even in his cross-examination as to him having incurred any expense on his treatment/ medicine and / or hospitalization. Even in his cross-examination, he admitted that he had not filed any record pertaining to his medical bills and treatment record, but he took no further steps to bring the same on record nor took any steps to summon any witness from the concerned hospital to prove any expenses towards his treatment/ medicines or hospitalization. Thus, in the absence of any evidence having been brought on record in respect of any medical/treatment expense, he is not awarded any amount under this head.
38. In respect of expenses towards nourishing food/ conveyance and attendant charges, it is noted that the Petitioner has led no evidence to prove that he had incurred any expense on the same, and even admitted in his cross-examination that he had not filed any document qua the same. Be that as it may, though he has not Digitally signed MACT No. 606/24 by POOJA In Respect of FIR No. 398/24 PS Wazirabad POOJA AGGARWAL Page No. 15 of 34 Ajay Kumar v. Anil Kumar & Ors. AGGARWAL Date:
2026.02.21 13:03:31 +0530 brought on record any document to substantiate his claim of the expenses, but at the same time, it is not overlooked that in view of the injuries sustained by the Petitioner and considering that he remained under treatment for about two weeks after the accident, i.e. till atleast 03.05.2024, the Petitioner would have incurred expenses on special diet for his speedy recovery/ conveyance and misc expenses (including attendant charges). That being so, a sum of ₹10,000/- is awarded to the Petitioner under the head of special diet/ conveyance and misc expenses (attendant charges).
(ii) Loss of earnings (and other gains) comprising:
(a) Loss of earning during the period of treatment;
(b) Loss of future earnings on account of permanent disability.
39. In respect of loss of earning during the period of treatment , it is noted that as per the medical documents on record along with the DAR, the Petitioner has remained remained hospitalized since 24.04.2024 till atleast 03.05.2024 i.e. the date of his discharge, and as per in view of the nature of his injuries and treatment i.e. fracture and plating thereof, he is bound to have suffered loss of income for the period of treatment. Hence, he is entitled to be compensated for the loss of his income for the aforementioned period of treatment of about 10 days.
40. To compute the same, the quantum of monthly income of Petitioner needs to be ascertained. It is noted that as PW1, the Petitioner he has testified in Ex PW1/A that he was earning about ₹40,000/- per month being an advocate. He also relied upon his ITRs for the Assessment Year 2023-2024 and 2024- MACT No. 606/24 Digitally signed by In Respect of FIR No. 398/24 PS Wazirabad POOJA POOJA AGGARWAL Page No. 16 of 34 Ajay Kumar v. Anil Kumar & Ors. AGGARWAL Date: 2026.02.21 13:03:41 +0530 2025 i.e. Ex PW1/K(colly) as well as on his ID issued by the Bar Council of Delhi i.e. Ex X2 and ITR for the Assessment Year 2025-2026 i.e. Ex X1.
41. A perusal of the ITR, Ex. PW1/K(colly) for the assessment year 2024-2025 reveals that as per the said ITR, the income of the Petitioner is reflected as ₹4,66,040/-, which implies his monthly income would be around ₹38,836.66/- per month immediately prior to the accident. The Petitioner has also brought on record the ITR for the Assessment Year 2025-2026 i.e. Ex. X1, as per which his annual income was ₹2,90,750/- after the accident. That being so, the income of the Petitioner shall be considered as per the ITR immediately prior to the accident, as determination of income is to be made on the basis of ITR when available.
42. Strength for this interpretation is drawn from the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Malarvizhi v. United India Insurance Co. Ltd., (2020) 4 SCC 228, wherein it was held that:
"We are in agreement with the High Court that the determination must proceed on the basis of the income tax return, where available. The income tax return is a statutory document on which reliance may be placed to determine the annual income of the deceased."
(Emphasis supplied)
43. In view of the ITR for the assessment year 2024-2025 i.e. Ex PW1/K(colly), where the income of the Petitioner is reflected as ₹4,66,040/-,his monthly income would be taken to ₹38,836.66/- per month and consequently, his loss of income is computed to be ₹12,946/- (rounded off from ₹12,945.55/-) (₹38,836.66/-x Digitally signed by MACT No. 606/24 POOJA POOJA AGGARWAL In Respect of FIR No. 398/24 PS Wazirabad AGGARWAL Date: 2026.02.21 Page No. 17 of 34 Ajay Kumar v. Anil Kumar & Ors. 13:03:49 +0530 10/30). Hence, the Petitioner is awarded a sum of ₹12,946/ - towards loss of income due to treatment.
44. In respect of the loss of future earnings, the Petitioner has relied upon his disability certificate issued by Aruna Asaf Ali Hospital dated 27.02.2025 i.e. Ex PW1/J, as per which he has 06% permanent physical impairment in relation to his right upper limb, which is non-progressive and not likely to improve and he has, inter-alia, claimed compensation on account of prospective income as well.
45. In Raj Kumar Vs. Ajay Kumar & Ors. (2011) 1 SCC 34, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has noted that:
"Disability refers to any restriction or lack of ability to perform an activity in the manner considered normal for a human-being. Permanent disability refers to the residuary incapacity or loss of use of some part of the body, found existing at the end of the period of treatment and recuperation, after achieving the maximum bodily improvement or recovery which is likely to remain for the remainder life of the injured. Temporary disability refers to the incapacity or loss of use of some part of the body on account of the injury, which will cease to exist at the end of the period of treatment and recuperation. Permanent disability can be either partial or total. Partial permanent disability refers to a person's inability to perform all the duties and bodily functions that he could perform before the accident, though he is able to perform some of them and is still able to engage in some gainful activity. Total permanent disability refers to a person's inability to perform any avocation or employment related activities as a result of the accident. The permanent disabilities that may arise from motor accidents injuries, are of a much wider range when compared to the physical disabilities which are enumerated in the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995(`Disabilities Act' for short). But if any of the disabilities enumerated in section 2(i) of the Disabilities Act are the result of injuries sustained in a motor accident, they can be permanent disabilities for the purpose of claiming compensation.
(Emphasis supplied)
Digitally signed
by POOJA
MACT No. 606/24 POOJA AGGARWAL
In Respect of FIR No. 398/24 PS Wazirabad AGGARWAL Date: Page No. 18 of 34
2026.02.21
Ajay Kumar v. Anil Kumar & Ors. 13:03:58 +0530
46. It is has been further observed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Raj Kumar Vs. Ajay Kumar & Ors., (2011) 1 SCC 34 that:
"9. The percentage of permanent disability is expressed by the Doctors with reference to the whole body, or more often than not, with reference to a particular limb. When a disability certificate states that the injured has suffered permanent disability to an extent of 40% of all his four limbs, it is not the same as 40% permanent disability with reference to the whole body. The extent of disability of a limb (or part of the body) expressed in terms of a percentage of the total functions of that limb, obviously cannot be assumed to be the extent of disability of the whole body. If there is 60% permanent disability of the right hand and 80% permanent disability of left leg, it does not mean that the extent of permanent disability with reference to the whole body is 140% (that is 80% plus 60%). If different parts of the body have suffered different percentages of disabilities, the sum total thereof expressed in terms of the permanent disability with reference to the whole body, cannot obviously exceed 100%.
10. Where the claimant suffers a permanent disability as a result of injuries, the assessment of compensation under the head of loss of future earnings, would depend upon the effect and impact of such permanent disability on his earning capacity. The Tribunal should not mechanically apply the percentage of permanent disability as the percentage of economic loss or loss of earning capacity. In most of the cases, the percentage of economic loss, that is, percentage of loss of earning capacity, arising from a permanent disability will be different from the percentage of permanent disability. Some Tribunals wrongly assume that in all cases, a particular extent (percentage) of permanent disability would result in a corresponding loss of earning capacity, and consequently, if the evidence produced show 45% as the permanent disability, will hold that there is 45% loss of future earning capacity. In most of the cases, equating the extent (percentage) of loss of earning capacity to the extent (percentage) of permanent disability will result in award of either too low or too high a compensation.
11. What requires to be assessed by the Tribunal is the effect of the permanently disability on the earning capacity of the injured; and after assessing the loss of earning capacity in terms of a percentage of the income, it has to be quantified in terms of money, to arrive at the future loss of earnings (by applying the standard multiplier method used to determine loss of dependency). We may however note that in some cases, on appreciation of evidence and assessment, the Tribunal may find that percentage of loss of earning capacity as a result of the permanent disability, is approximately the same as the percentage of permanent disability in which case, of course, the Tribunal will adopt the said percentage for determination of compensation (see for example, the decisions of this court in Arvind Kumar Mishra v. New India Assurance Co.Ltd. -Digitally signed by POOJA
MACT No. 606/24 POOJA AGGARWAL
In Respect of FIR No. 398/24 PS Wazirabad AGGARWAL Date: Page No. 19 of 34
2026.02.21
Ajay Kumar v. Anil Kumar & Ors. 13:04:06 +0530
2010(10) SCALE 298 and Yadava Kumar v. D.M., National Insurance Co. Ltd. - 2010 (8) SCALE 567).
12. Therefore, the Tribunal has to first decide whether there is any permanent disability and if so the extent of such permanent disability. This means that the tribunal should consider and decide with reference to the evidence:
(i) whether the disablement is permanent or temporary;
(ii) if the disablement is permanent, whether it is permanent total disablement or permanent partial disablement,
(iii) if the disablement percentage is expressed with reference to any specific limb, then the effect of such disablement of the limb on the functioning of the entire body, that is the permanent disability suffered by the person.
If the Tribunal concludes that there is no permanent disability then there is no question of proceeding further and determining the loss of future earning capacity. But if the Tribunal concludes that there is permanent disability then it will proceed to ascertain its extent. After the Tribunal ascertains the actual extent of permanent disability of the claimant based on the medical evidence, it has to determine whether such permanent disability has affected or will affect his earning capacity.
13. Ascertainment of the effect of the permanent disability on the actual earning capacity involves three steps. The Tribunal has to first ascertain what activities the claimant could carry on in spite of the permanent disability and what he could not do as a result of the permanent ability (this is also relevant for awarding compensation under the head of loss of amenities of life). The second step is to ascertain his avocation, profession and nature of work before the accident, as also his age. The third step is to find out whether (i) the claimant is totally disabled from earning any kind of livelihood, or
(ii) whether in spite of the permanent disability, the claimant could still effectively carry on the activities and functions, which he was earlier carrying on, or (iii) whether he was prevented or restricted from discharging his previous activities and functions, but could carry on some other or lesser scale of activities and functions so that he continues to earn or can continue to earn his livelihood."
(Emphasis supplied)
47. In the present case, the 06% permanent physical impairment reflected in the disability certificate is in relation to the left upper limb of the Petitioner, and not with reference to the whole body, but the Respondents have not brought on record anything to disbelieve the said disability report. No specific evidence has been brought on record by the Petitioner to prove his functional disability, but keeping in view the nature of injuries sustained by Digitally signed MACT No. 606/24 by POOJA POOJA AGGARWAL In Respect of FIR No. 398/24 PS Wazirabad AGGARWAL Date: 2026.02.21 Page No. 20 of 34 Ajay Kumar v. Anil Kumar & Ors. 13:04:13 +0530 the Petitioner and considering that he was working as an advocate, his functional disability is taken to be 03% in relation to the whole body.
48. In respect of the loss of future income on account of permanent disability, it is noted that as the time of the accident i.e. on 24.04.2024, the injured/Petitioner was aged about 33 years as his date of birth is reflected as 15.06.1990 in his Aadhar Card i.e. Ex PW1/B.
49. His notional income has already been assessed to be ₹38,836.66/- per month on the basis of his ITR. I n view of the proposition laid down in Erudhaya Priya v. State Express Transport Corporation Ltd., 2020 SCC OnLine SC 601 (citing Jagdish v. Mohan, (2018) 4 SCC 571), the Petitioner is also entitled to the grant of future prospects. Thus, in view of the judgment in National Insurance Company Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi, (2017) 16 SCC 680, 40% of the established income is to be added to the monthly income towards future prospects, if the injured is aged less than 40 years. That being so, an amount of ₹15,535/- (rounded off from ₹15,534.66/-) shall be added to the notional monthly income, and thus the monthly income inclusive of the future prospects comes to be ₹54,371/- (rounded off from ₹54,371.32/-) and the annual income comes to be ₹6,52,452/-(₹54,371- x 12).
50. Further, as the Petitioner was aged about 33 years at the time of the accident, a multiplier of 16 shall be applicable (Ref: Sarla Verma & Ors. Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation & Anr., (2009) 6 Digitally signed by POOJA MACT No. 606/24 POOJA AGGARWAL In Respect of FIR No. 398/24 PS Wazirabad AGGARWAL Date: 2026.02.21 Page No. 21 of 34 Ajay Kumar v. Anil Kumar & Ors.
13:04:23 +0530 SCC 121) and therefore, the notional income of the Petitioner/ injured comes to be ₹1,04,39,232/-(₹6,52,452/- x 16).
51. As the functional disability of the Petitioner has been taken to 03%, the loss of future earnings on account of permanent disability caused to the Petitioner arising out of the accident comes to be ₹3,13,177/- (i.e.03% of the notional income) (rounded off from ₹3,13,176.96/-) and the Petitioner/injured is awarded the same.
(iii) Future medical expenses.
52. The Petitioner has not led any evidence as to any foreseeable medical expenses arising in the future due to the injury sustained by him in the accident. Hence, no amount is awarded to him under this head.
B. Non-pecuniary damages (General Damages)
(iv) Damages for pain, suffering and trauma as a consequence of the injuries.
53. In respect of the damages under this head, it is noted that the factum of the Petitioner/injured having sustained grievous injuries with 06% permanent disability in his left upper limb already stands proved. Further, as per the treatment documents placed on record alongwith the DAR, he remained under treatment from the date of the accident i.e. 24.04.2024 till atleast 17.05.2024. Due to the nature of injuries and considering the age of the Petitioner/injured at the time of the accident, it can safely be inferred that he must have suffered pain and trauma due to the accident. Accordingly, a lump sum amount of ₹25,000/- is granted in favour of the Petitioner towards MACT No. 606/24 In Respect of FIR No. 398/24 PS Wazirabad Page No. 22 of 34 Ajay Kumar v. Anil Kumar & Ors. POOJA Digitally signed by POOJA AGGARWAL AGGARWAL Date: 2026.02.21 13:04:30 +0530 damages for pain, suffering and trauma as a consequence of the injuries.
(v) Loss of amenities (and/or loss of prospects of marriage).
54. In the present case, as the Petitioner has sustained grievous injury in the accident resulting in 06% disability, it cannot be ignored that he faces a possibility of denial of enjoyment of the simple pleasures of life. That being so, a sum of ₹5,000/- is awarded to the Petitioner/ injured towards loss of amenities.
(vi) Loss of expectation of life (shortening of normal longevity).
55. No evidence has been brought on record by the petitioners to show as to whether there is any loss of expectation of life due to the injuries sustained by the Petitioner in the accident. That being so, no amount is awarded to the petitioner under this head.
56. For the sake of convenience, the amount as awarded to the Petitioner in respect of issue no.2 is summarized as under:-
S. No. HEAD AMOUNT
1. Treatment /medicine expenses NIL
2. Hospitalization expenses
3. Special Diet ₹10,000/-
4. Transport/conveyance ₹10,000/-
5. Misc Expenses/ Attendant ₹10,000/-
Charges
6. Loss of earning during ₹12,946/-
hospitalization
7. Loss of future earnings on ₹3,13,177/-
account of permanent
disability
MACT No. 606/24
Digitally signed by
In Respect of FIR No. 398/24 PS Wazirabad POOJA POOJA AGGARWAL Page No. 23 of 34
Ajay Kumar v. Anil Kumar & Ors. AGGARWAL Date: 2026.02.21
13:04:36 +0530
8. Damages for pain, suffering ₹25,000/-
and trauma as a consequence of the injuries
9. Loss of amenities ₹5,000/-
10. Loss of expectation of life NIL TOTAL ₹3,86,123/-
57. In respect of entitlement of the Petitioner to interest on the awarded amount, it is duly noted that in the present matter is pending since 13.08.2024 and the rate of interest of fixed deposits in Nationalized banks has fluctuated several times during the pendency of the present proceedings. Thus, in the interest of justice and keeping in view the principles discussed in order dated 21.04.2023 passed by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in United India Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Baby Raksha & Ors, MAC APP. No. 36/2023, the Petitioner is awarded interest @ 7.5% per annum, from the date of filing of petition, that is, with effect from 13.08.2024 till the date of the award towards interest. The amount of interim award, if any, be deducted from the above amount, if the same has already been paid to the Petitioners.
Liability
58. At the very outset, it is noted that it is not in dispute that the offending vehicle was insured with the Respondent No.2/ insurance company at the time of the accident i.e. as on 24.04.2024. The Respondent No.1 being the driver-cum-owner is liable to pay the awarded amount of compensation to Petitioner. However, since the offending vehicle was insured with Respondent No.2 at the time of accident and the Digitally signed by POOJA MACT No. 606/24 POOJA AGGARWAL In Respect of FIR No. 398/24 PS Wazirabad AGGARWAL Date: Page No. 24 of 34 2026.02.21 Ajay Kumar v. Anil Kumar & Ors. 13:04:43 +0530 Respondent No.2 / Insurance Company has not raised any statutory defence in denial of their liability, hence, the Respondent No.2 shall be liable to pay the compensation amount to the Petitioner.
59. Issue No. 2 and 3 are decided, accordingly.
Disbursement/ Release
60. As per the Financial Statement of Petitioner, the monthly expenses of the family are approximately ₹30,000/- per month. Hence, while deciding the quantum and manner of disbursement of the awarded amounts, the following directions given by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court vide orders dated 07.12.2018 & 08.01.2021 in FAO No. 842/2003 titled Rajesh Tyagi & Ors. Vs. Jaivir Singh & Ors. have to be borne in mind:
"(i) The bank shall not permit any joint name to be added in the saving account or fixed deposit accounts of the claimants i.e. saving bank accounts of the claimants shall be an individual saving bank account and not a joint account.
(ii) 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 claimants.
(iii) The maturity amount of the FDRs be credited by the ECS in the saving bank account of the claimant near the place of their residence.
(iv) No loan, advance or withdrawal or premature discharge be allowed on the fixed deposits without the permission of the court.
(v) The concerned bank shall not issue any cheque book and/or debit card to claimants. 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 card(s) freeze the account of claimants so that no debit card be issued in respect of the account of claimants from any other branch of the bank.Digitally signed
by POOJA MACT No. 606/24 POOJA AGGARWAL In Respect of FIR No. 398/24 PS Wazirabad AGGARWAL Date: 2026.02.21 Page No. 25 of 34 Ajay Kumar v. Anil Kumar & Ors. 13:04:49 +0530
(vi) The bank shall make an endorsement on the passbook of the claimant to the effect, that no cheque books and/or debit card have been issued and shall not be issued without the permission of the Court and the claimant shall produced the passbook with the necessary endorsement before the Court for compliance."
61. Thereafter, in Parminder Singh vs Honey Goyal, S.L.P. (C) No. 4484 OF 2020 as decided by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India on 18 March, 2025 it has been further directed that:
"17. The case in hand pertains to the compensation awarded under the Motor Vehicles Act. The general practice followed by the insurance companies, where the compensation is not disputed, is to deposit the same before the Tribunal. Instead of following that process, a direction can always be issued to transfer the amount into the bank account(s) of the claimant(s) with intimation to the Tribunal.
17.1 For that purpose, the Tribunals at the initial stage of pleadings or at the stage of leading evidence may require the claimant(s) to furnish their bank account particulars to the Tribunal along with the requisite proof, so that at the stage of passing of the award the Tribunal may direct that the amount of compensation be transferred in the account of the claimant and if there are more than one then in their respective accounts. If there is no bank account, then they should be required to open the bank account either individually or jointly with family members only. It should also be mandated that, in case there is any change in the bank account particulars of the claimant(s) during the pendency of the claim petition they should update the same before the Tribunal. This should be ensured before passing of the final award. It may be ensured that the bank account should be in the name of the claimant(s) and if minor, through guardian(s) and in no case it should be a joint account with any person, who is not a family member. The transfer of the amount in the bank account, particulars of which have been furnished by the claimant(s), as mentioned in the award, shall be treated as satisfaction of the award. Intimation of compliance should be furnished to the Tribunal."
(Emphasis supplied)
62. In view of the same, the award amount can now be disbursed in the Savings Bank Account of the Petitioner. However, the remaining directions as passed by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court shall be complied with.
Digitally signed MACT No. 606/24 by POOJA
In Respect of FIR No. 398/24 PS Wazirabad POOJA AGGARWAL
Page No. 26 of 34
Ajay Kumar v. Anil Kumar & Ors. AGGARWAL Date:
2026.02.21
13:04:56 +0530
63. After considering the financial statement of the Petitioner Ajay Kumar, it is directed that upon realization of the awarded amount of ₹4,30,205/-(inclusive of interest of ₹44,802/- (rounded off), a sum of ₹70,205/- (Rupees Seventy Thousand Two Hundred and Five Only) shall be released to him immediately in his Bank Account No. 44900595859, IFSC Code SBIN0000726, State Bank of India, Tis Hazari Courts Branch, Delhi as furnished by him at the time of recording of his financial statement.
64. The balance amount of ₹3,60,000/- (Rupees Three Lakhs Sixty Thousand Only) shall be put in 12 monthly fixed deposits in his name in his account as mentioned above of equal amount of ₹30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand only) each for a period of 01 month to 12 months respectively, with cumulative interest, in terms of the directions contained in FAO No. 842/2003 dated 07.12.2018 & 08.01.2021. Besides the above said amount, amount of FDRs on maturity, shall automatically be transferred in his saving account maintained in the nationalized bank situated near the place of his residence.
65. The Respondent No.2 / Go Digit General Insurance Co. Ltd is directed to deposit the awarded sum of ₹4,30,205/- (Rupees Four Lakhs Thirty Thousand Two Hundred and Five Only) inclusive of interest @ 7.5% p.a. from the date of filing of petition i.e. w.e.f. 13.08.2024 till the date of the award within 30 days by way of NEFT or RTGS mode directly in the MACT account of the petitioner as mentioned in the Para No. 63 of this award under intimation to the Petitioner as well as this Tribunal MACT No. 606/24 In Respect of FIR No. 398/24 PS Wazirabad Digitally signed by POOJA Page No. 27 of 34 Ajay Kumar v. Anil Kumar & Ors. POOJA AGGARWAL AGGARWAL +0530 Date: 2026.02.21 13:05:03 failing which the said Respondent shall be liable to pay interest @ 12 % per annum for the period of delay beyond 30 days. (Ref: Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Niru @ Niharika & Ors. SLP no. 22136 of 2024 decided on 14.07.2025 by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.)
66. The concerned Manager of the bank of the Petitioner is directed to release the amount to the Petitioner as per the award upon completion of necessary formalities as per the rules under intimation to the Tribunal. He is directed to keep the amount in fixed deposits as per the directions given in the award and to send a compliance report to this court. He is also directed to ensure that no loan, advance or pre mature discharge is allowed on the fixed deposit without an order of this court.
67. A digital copy of this award be forwarded to the parties free of cost.
68. The summary of the award as per Form XV of the Annexure XIII and particulars of compliance of the Provisions of the Scheme as per Form XVII of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 as amended by the Central Motor Vehicles (Fifth Amendment) Rules, 2022, are also annexed with this Award as Annexure A and B respectively, and shall form a part of this award.
69. Ahlmad is directed to send the copy of the award to Ld. Judicial Magistrate First Class concerned and Delhi Legal Services Authority in view of Central Motor Vehicles (Fifth Amendment) Digitally signed by MACT No. 606/24 POOJA POOJA AGGARWAL In Respect of FIR No. 398/24 PS Wazirabad AGGARWAL Date: 2026.02.21 Page No. 28 of 34 Ajay Kumar v. Anil Kumar & Ors. 13:05:10 +0530 Rules, 2022 [(Directions at serial nos. 39, 40 of Procedure for Investigation of Motor Vehicle Accidents (under Rule 150A)].
70. Ahlmad is further directed to comply with the directions passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi on 06.01.2021 in MAC.APP No. 10/2021 titled as New India Assurance Company Ltd. Vs. Sangeeta Vaid & Ors., regarding digitization of the records.
71. Ahlmad is directed to e-mail an authenticated copy of the award to the insurer as directed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in WP (Civil) No. 534/2020 titled as Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India & Ors. on 16.03.2021 and also e-mail an authenticated copy of the award to Branch Manager, SBI, Tis Hazari Courts for information and compliance.
72. Nazir is directed to maintain the record in Form XVIII in view of Central Motor Vehicles (Fifth Amendment) Rules, 2022 [(Directions at serial no. 41 of Procedure for Investigation of Motor Vehicle Accidents (under Rule 150A).
73. This file be consigned to the Record Room after necessary compliance and a separate file be prepared for compliance report and put up the same on 23.03.2026.
Announced in the Open Court by POOJA
Digitally signed
today i.e. on 21 February 2026 POOJA AGGARWAL
AGGARWAL Date: 2026.02.21
13:05:17 +0530
(POOJA AGGARWAL)
Presiding Officer, MACT-02 (Central)
Tis Hazari, Delhi
Digitally signed
by POOJA
MACT No. 606/24 POOJA AGGARWAL
In Respect of FIR No. 398/24 PS Wazirabad AGGARWAL Date: Page No. 29 of 34
Ajay Kumar v. Anil Kumar & Ors. 2026.02.21
13:05:29 +0530
ANNEXURE A
FORM - XVI, Central Motor Vehicles (Fifth Amendment) Rules, 2022 (part of Annexure XIII. Ref: Rule 150A) SUMMARY OF THE COMPUTATION OF AWARD AMOUNT IN INJURY CASES TO BE INCORPORATED IN THE AWARD
1. Date of accident : 24.04.2024
2. Name of the injured : Mr. Ajay Kumar
3. Age of the injured : 33 years
4. Occupation of the injured : Practicing Advocate
5. Income of the injured : Assessed on the basis of ITR
6. Nature of injury : Grievous
7. Medical treatment taken by the injured : As per record
8. Period of Hospitalization : 24.04.2024 to 03.05.2024
9. Whether any permanent disability?
If yes, give details : Yes, permanent physical disability of 06% in relation to his left Upper Limb
10. Computation of Compensation S.No. Heads Awarded by Claims Tribunal
11. Pecuniary Loss:
(i) Expenditure on treatment NIL
(ii) Expenditure on conveyance ₹10,,000/-
(iii) Expenditure on special diet ₹10,000/-
(iv) Cost of Misc expenses/ ₹10,000/-
attendant
(v) Cost of artificial limb --
(vi) Loss of earning capacity --
MACT No. 606/24 Digitally signed by
In Respect of FIR No. 398/24 PS Wazirabad POOJA POOJA AGGARWAL Page No. 30 of 34
Ajay Kumar v. Anil Kumar & Ors. AGGARWAL Date: 2026.02.21
13:05:38 +0530
(vii) Loss of income ₹12,946/- (rounded off)
(viii) 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 ₹25,000/-
physical shock
(ii) Pain and suffering
(iii) Loss of amenities of life ₹5,000/-
(iv) Disfiguration N.A.
(v) Loss of marriage prospects N.A.
(vi) Loss of earning, N.A.
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 Permanent physical assessed and nature of disability of 06% in relation disability as permanent or to his left upper limb.
temporary
(ii) Loss of amenities or loss of N.A.
expectation of life span on
account of disability
(iii) Percentage of loss of earning 03%
capacity in relation to
disability
(iv) Loss of future Income - ₹3,13,177/- (rounded off)
(Income × % Earning
Capacity = Multiplier)
14. TOTAL COMPENSATION ₹3,86,123/- (rounded off)
15. INTEREST AWARDED 7.5% p.a.
16. Interest amount up to the date ₹44,802/- (rounded off) MACT No. 606/24 Digitally signed by POOJA In Respect of FIR No. 398/24 PS Wazirabad POOJA AGGARWAL Page No. 31 of 34 Ajay Kumar v. Anil Kumar & Ors. AGGARWAL Date: 2026.02.21 13:05:44 +0530 of award
17. Total amount including ₹4,30,205/- (rounded off) interest
18. Award amount released ₹70,205/-
19. Award amount kept in FDRs ₹3,60,000/-
20. Mode of disbursement of the Mentioned in the award award amount to the claimant(s)
21. Next date for compliance of 23.03.2026 the award
1. Prepared as per award dated 21.02.2026.
2. A separate file was ordered to be prepared by the Nazir with directions to put up the same on 23.03.2026.Digitally signed by
POOJA POOJA AGGARWAL
AGGARWAL Date: 2026.02.21
13:05:51 +0530
(POOJA AGGARWAL)
Presiding Officer, MACT-02 (Central)
Tis Hazari, Delhi
21.02.2026
Digitally signed
MACT No. 606/24 by POOJA
In Respect of FIR No. 398/24 PS Wazirabad POOJA AGGARWAL
Page No. 32 of 34
Ajay Kumar v. Anil Kumar & Ors. AGGARWAL Date:
2026.02.21
13:05:58 +0530
ANNEXURE B
FORM - XVII, Central Motor Vehicles (Fifth Amendment) Rules, 2022 (part of Annexure XIII. Ref: Rule 150A) Compliance of provisions of Scheme to be mentioned in the Award
1. Date of the accident 24.04.2024
2. Date of filing of Form-I - First Accident 30.05.2024 Report (FAR)
3. Date of delivery of Form-II to the N.A. victim(s)
4. Date of receipt of Form-III from the N.A. Driver
5. Date of receipt of Form-IV from the N.A. Owner
6. Date of filing of the Form-V-Interim N.A. Accident Report (IAR)
7. Date of receipt of Form-VIA and Form- N.A. VIB from the Victim(s)
8. Date of filing of Form-VII - Detailed 13.08.2024 Accident Report (DAR)
9. Whether there was any delay or deficiency on the part of the Investigating No Officer? If so, whether any action/ direction warranted?
10. Date of appointment of the Designated Not mentioned Officer by the Insurance Company
11. Whether the Designated Officer of the No Insurance Company submitted his report within 30 days of the DAR?
12. Whether there was any delay or Yes.
deficiency on the part of the Designated No officer of the Insurance Company? If so, whether any action/ direction warranted?
13. Date of response of the petitioner(s) to the N.A. offer of the Insurance Company.
MACT No. 606/24 Digitally signed
In Respect of FIR No. 398/24 PS Wazirabad POOJA by POOJA Page No. 33 of 34
AGGARWAL
Ajay Kumar v. Anil Kumar & Ors. AGGARWAL Date: 2026.02.21
13:06:03 +0530
14. Date of the award 21.02.2026
15. Whether the petitioner (s) was/were Yes
directed to open savings bank account(s) near their place of residence?
16. Date of order by which claimant(s) 13.08.2024 was/were directed to open savings bank account(s) near his place of residence and produce PAN Card and Adhaar Card and the direction to the bank not issue any cheque book/debit card to the claimant(s) and make an endorsement to this effect on the passbook.
17. Date on which the claimant(s) produced 19.02.2026 the passbook of their savings bank account near the place of their residence along with the endorsement, PAN Card and Adhaar Card?
18. Permanent Residential Address of the H. No. B-222, Claimant(s). Block B, Street No. 11, Bhajanpura, Delhi-110053
19. Whether the claimant(s) savings bank No account(s) is near his place of residence?
20. Whether the claimant(s) were examined at Yes the time of passing of the award to ascertain his/their financial condition?
Digitally signed by POOJA POOJA AGGARWAL
AGGARWAL Date: 2026.02.21
13:06:09 +0530
(POOJA AGGARWAL)
Presiding Officer, MACT-02 (Central)
Tis Hazari, Delhi
21.02.2026
MACT No. 606/24 Digitally signed
by POOJA
In Respect of FIR No. 398/24 PS Wazirabad POOJA AGGARWAL Page No. 34 of 34
Ajay Kumar v. Anil Kumar & Ors. AGGARWAL Date:
2026.02.21
13:06:14 +0530