Delhi District Court
Mrs. Jai Kaur W/O. Late Sh. Mahavir Singh vs Siya Ram on 14 February, 2007
IN THE COURT OF SHRI CHANDER SHEKHAR : JUDGE : MACT : DELHI.
SUIT NO. 163/04
1. Mrs. Jai kaur W/o. Late Sh. Mahavir Singh
2. Dharambir Singh S/o. Late Sh. Mahavir Singh
3. Umesh Kumar S/o. Late Sh. Mahavir Singh
4. Miss Jamana D/o. Late Sh. Mahavir Singh
5. Rakesh Kumar S/o. Late Sh. Mahavir Singh
6. Santosh D/o. Late Sh. Mahavir Singh
All residents of H.No. 242, V.P.O. Nahari,
Near Nimowali Chaupal,
Distt. Sonepat, Haryana.
..........PETITIONERS
VERSUS
1. Siya Ram, S/o. Sh. Prem Singh
R/o. VPO, Bindroli, P.S. Rai
Distt. Sonepat, Haryana
2. City Life Line Travels Pvt. Ltd.
R/o. 8551/2, Roshanara Road
Delhi -7.
3. National Insurance Company Ltd.
Code No. 361003, Direct Agent Branch
Punjabi Bagh-II, Building no. 2 & 3,
Central Market, Ist floor, West Punjabi Bagh
New Delhi - 110026.
......................RESPONDENTS
DATE OF INSTITUTION :-31.08.04 DATE OF AWARD:-14.02.2007 1 AWARD:-
1. The brief facts of the present petition are that on 09.05.2004 at about 11.30 a.m., the deceased after taking his lunch was going for toilet on the other side of the road near Azadpur Red Light on Ring Road, when all of a sudden a Blue Line bus bearing no. DL-1PB-4183 driven by Respondent no.1 in a most rash and negligent manner in shooting speed, without blowing any horn, without caring for the deceased and without caring for the other traffic rules came from CNG Pump side and hit the deceased, as a result of which deceased fell down on the road and sustained grievous and multiple injuries and the deceased became unconscious. The deceased was removed from the place of accident and got admitted in Babu Jagjivan Ram Memorial Hospital, Jahangir Puri, Delhi where he was declared as brought dead by the doctors of said hospital and his Postmortem was conducted. FIR No. 286/2004 was registered at PS Model Town u/s 279/304-A IPC. The petitioners have filed the present petition for getting compensation of rupees sixteen lacs arraying the driver, owner and insurer of the offending vehicle as Respondents no. 1 to 3.
2. Respondent no.1 in its written statement has denied the case of the petitioner and submitted that the deceased was hit by another vehicle which was ahead 2 of his bus. However, he has not disputed the insurance of the offending vehicle with Respondent no.3 but he absented himself and was proceeded ex-
parte as per order sheet dated 6.12.2004.
3. Respondent no.2 in its written statement has also denied the case of the petitioner but has not disputed the insurance of the offending vehicle with Respondent no.3.
4. Respondent no.3 in its written statement has also denied the case of the petitioner but has admitted the insurance of the offending vehicle with it.
5. No replication was filed by Ld. Counsel for the petitioners to the written statements of the respondents. On the pleadings of the parties, following issues were framed on 19.09.2005:-
(i) Whether deceased sustained injuries due to rash and negligent driving of Blue Line bus no. DL-1PB-4183 by respondent no.1 on 09.05.04 at 11.30 a.m. at CNG Petrol Pump, near Azadpur Traffic Light within the jurisdiction of PS Model Town?
(ii) Whether the petitioners are entitled to compensation? If so, to what amount?
(iii) Relief.
6. Petitioners have produced and examined PW1 Sh. Ravinder Singh-eye 3 witness by way of affidavit Ex.PW1/X, PW2 Sh. Jagdish Kumar by way of affidavit Ex.PW2/1. Petitioner no.1 has also examined herself by way of affidavit Ex.PW3/1 as PW3.
7. I have heard the arguments as submitted by Ld. respective Counsels for the petitioners, respondents no. 2 and 3 and have gone through the entire material on record. Now on the basis of material proved on record and in the light of arguments, I proceed to decide the case on merit. My findings on each issue are as under :-
8. ISSUE NO.1:-
PW1 Sh. Ravinder Singh-eye witness has clearly stated that on 9.5.2004 at about 11.30 a.m. deceased Rajesh was crossing the road near Azadpur Red Light to go to toilet on the other side of the road, in the meantime a blue line bus bearing no. DL-1PB-4183 driven by respondent no.1 in a most rash and negligent manner and in very fast speed came from CNG Pump side and hit the deceased, due to which deceased fell down on the road and received grievous injuries and became unconscious and the bus driver was caught at the spot and his name was revealed as Siyaram. PW1 Ravinder Singh has further stated that he alongwith Siyaram-respondent no.1 removed the deceased to Babu Jagjivan Ram Memorial Hospital, Jahangir Puri Delhi 4 where he was declared as brought dead.
During cross-examination of this witness by Ld. Counsel for respondent no.3, date, time and place of the accident is not disputed. Respondent no.1 in his written statement has stated that the deceased was hit by another vehicle which was ahead of his bus. Respondent no.1 has neither stated the number of the vehicle which has allegedly hit the deceased and its driver nor has come into witness box to substantiate his plea, so this plea of respondent no.1 is not believable. Respondent no.1 absented himself after filing the written statement and he could have been the best person to explain the circumstances of the accident. Respondent no. 1 has not produced and proved any complaint made by him to any higher authority regarding his false implication. FIR in this case is recorded on the basis of statement of Sh. Ravinder-PW1 who has clearly stated the date, time and place of the accident, number of the offending vehicle and name of the driver. Postmortem report Ex. PW1/E and death certificate Ex. PW1/F of deceased Rajesh also shows that deceased expired on 9.5.2004. Police during investigation has also arrested the respondent no. 1 as accused in criminal case as per chargesheet EX. PW3/C and seized the offending vehicle vide memo EX. PW1/G. In view of the statement of PW1 Sh. Ravinder Kumar-eye witness of the accident and 5 documents proved on record including postmortem report of the deceased, copy of FIR, chargesheet, seizure memo of offending vehicle, I hold that deceased sustained injuries due to rash and negligent driving of Blue Line bus no. DL-1PB-4183 by respondent no.1 on 09.05.04 at 11.30 a.m. at CNG Petrol Pump, near Azadpur Traffic Light within the jurisdiction of PS Model Town. Accordingly, issue NO.1 is decided in favour of the petitioners and against the respondents.
9. ISSUE NO. 2 :-
Petitioners have stated that after the above mentioned accident Ramesh Kumar died and he was taken to Babu Jagjiwan Ram Memorial Hospital, Delhi. Factum of death of Ramesh Kumar in the above accident is duly corroborated by postmortem report and death report and is not disputed by any respondent. Petitioners have deposed that deceased Rajesh Kumar was 31 years of age on the day of accident i.e. on 09.05.2004. Petitioners have stated that deceased was working as driver in Graduate Mini Bus Operators Transport Society and was earning Rs.5700/- per month. Petitioners have also produced Sh. Jagdish Kumar-PW2 who has stated that he is the Secretary of Graduate Mini Bus Operators Transport Society and deceased Rajesh Kumar was working as a driver with their transport society and was getting Rs.5,700/- 6
per month. He has proved salary certificate EX. PW2/A, DL EX. PW2/B and Driver Badge EX. PW2/C of deceased. Nothing material has come out during cross-examination of PW2 Sh. Jagdish Kumar by ld. Counsels for respondents no. 2 and 3. In the absence of any contrary evidence produced on record by any of the respondents, I hold that deceased was drawing monthly salary of Rs.5700/- per month at the time of accident. In this case petitioner no. 1 is the mother of the deceased and others are major, hence, keeping in view the law laid down in the case titled as Fakeerappa and another Vs. Karnataka Cement Pipe Factory and others reported in 2004 ACJ 699 regarding dependency, the age of the mother should be taken into consideration. In the case titled as Fakeerappa and another Vs. Karnataka Cement Pipe Factory and others reported in 2004 ACJ 699, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has taken the dependency of the parents as 50%, in case of death of unmarried boy, I assess the dependency of the petitioners at 50% of the income of the deceased and accordingly, the dependency of the petitioners shall be Rs.2850/- per month, which shall be Rs.34,200/- per annum. The age of the mother of the deceased/petitioner no. 1 Smt. Jai Kaur was less than 55 years at the time of accident as per the photocopy of ration card placed on record, hence as per Schedule II of MV Act, multiplier of 11 is being applied on the 7 annual multiplicant of Rs.34,200/- to get the total financial dependency of the petitioners which comes to Rs.3,76,200/-. To this sum, Rs.23,800/- is added for loss of Consortium, love and affection and expenses of last rites, making it a final compensation of Rs.4,00,000/- which respondents are jointly and severally liable to pay. This amount is inclusive of the interim award of Rs.50,000/- awarded to the petitioner no. 1. R3 M/s. National Insurance Company Limited has not led any evidence which could absolve it of its liability to indemnify the insured. Thus, it remains liable to indemnify the insured, hence, the respondent no. 3 i.e. National Insurance Company Limited is directed to pay the balance awarded amount of Rs.3,50,000/- to the petitioners. Issue no. 2 is accordingly decided in favour of the petitioners and against the respondents.
10.Relief:-
I hereby pass an award of Rs.4,00,000/- (Inclusive of Rs.50,000/- awarded as interim compensation to the petitioner no. 1) in favour of the Petitioners and against the respondents. Out of the balance awarded amount of Rs.3,50,000/-, respondent No. 3 is directed to deposit Rs.2,00,000/- in the name of petitioner no. 1 Smt. Jai Kuar and Rs.30,000/- each in the names of petitioners no. 2 to
6. 8
11.The petitioners are held entitled to interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of institution till the date of this award and direct respondent No. 3 i.e. M/s. National Insurance Company Limited, being insurer, to pay the balance awarded amount of Rs.3,50,000/- to all the petitioners along with corresponding interest as per the ratio mentioned above by way of deposit of separate cross cheques in favour of each petitioner in court within 30 days herefrom. In case of default of payment, further penal interest at the rate of 9% per annum shall accrue on the awarded amount in each case for each defaulting day.
12.One spare copy of the award be prepared and may be collected by the counsel for Insurance Company from court for expeditious compliance. File be consigned to Record Room after completing necessary formalities.
Announced in open court ( CHANDER SHEKHAR ) Dated:-14.02.2007 JUDGE:MACT:DELHI ( one spare copies attached) 9 10 11 12 13