Delhi District Court
Santosh Devi & Ors. vs . Ravinder Kumar & Anr. on 19 July, 2018
1
IN THE COURT OF SH. PARAMJIT SINGH PO : MACT (SOUTHWEST
DISTRICT), DWARKA COURTS: NEW DELHI
MACP No. 1326/2016
Santosh Devi & Ors. Vs. Ravinder Kumar & Anr.
CNR No. DLSW010002412013
1. Sh. Santosh Devi
W/o Late Sh. Banwari Lal
2. Sh. Mahesh Kumar
S/o Late Sh. Banwari Lal
3. Ms. Durgesh Kumari
D/o Late Sh. Banwari Lal
4. Sh. Dinesh Kumar
S/o Late Sh. Banwari Lal
5 Pawan Kumar
S/o Late Sh. Banwari Lal
All resident of :
D89, Sector1, J.J. Colony,
Dwarka, New Delhi110075 ... Petitioners
Versus
1. Sh. Ravinder Kumar (Driver)
S/o Sh. Gyasi Ram
R/o Maheswari, PS : Daruhera
District Rewari, Haryana
2. Sh. Sumar Singh ( Owner)
S/o Sh. Omkar Singh
R/o Maheswari, PS : Daruhera
District Rewari, Haryana
MACP No. 1326/2016 Santosh Devi & Ors. Vs. Ravinder Kumar & Ors. 1/24
2
3. Sri Ram General Insurance Company Ltd. (Insurer)
E8, EPIP RIICO Industrial Area,
Sitapur, Jaipur, Rajasthan302022 ... Respondents
Date of institution of the case 14.12.2013
Date on which, judgment have been reserved05.07.2018
Date of pronouncement of judgment 19.07.2018
JUDGMENT
The present claim petition u/s 166 & 140 of Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 for grant of compensation has been filed on behalf of petitioners Santosh Devi & Ors. against respondents Ravinder Kumar & Ors.
2. Brief facts as made out from the petition are that on 09.06.2013, petitioner no. 2 Mahesh Kumar alongwith his father Sh. Banwari Lal had gone to Jaipur on their motorcycle bearing no. DL 98X2735 to meet their family members and on 10.06.2013, the petitioner no. 2 was returning with his father from Jaipur on the abovesaid motorcycle and when they reached near Chanduwas Pull (Jaipur Delhi Highway), a Tata Cantre bearing no. HR 47A 7298 being driven by respondent no. 1 at a very high speed rashly, negligently and in violation of the traffic rules, hit their motorcycle and ran away. It is further stated that due to the impact, petitioner no. 2 and his father Banwari Lal fell down on the road and father of petitioner no.2 , who was driving the motor cycle, sustained serious injuries and was immediately rushed to Life Care Hospital, Rewari by the police and from that hospital because of serious injuries, father of petitioner no. 2 was brought to Park hospital, Keshopur, Delhi and was admitted in ICU, where ultimately he died on 18.06.2013 due to the injuries sustained by him in the accident. It is stated that deceased has been survived MACP No. 1326/2016 Santosh Devi & Ors. Vs. Ravinder Kumar & Ors. 2/24 3 by his wife and four children, who were totally dependent for their survival on deceased and after unfortunate accident and death of deceased because of negligent driving of R1, the life of entire family has been crippled. It is further stated that R3 being insurer of the above said vehicle, was liable to pay compensation and R1 being driver and R2 being owner were vicariously liable to pay compensation and it has been prayed that compensation for a sum of Rs.70 lacs with interest @ 12% pa from the date of claim petition till realization may be passed in favour of petitioners and against the respondents.
3. In their reply, R1 Ravinder Kumar (Driver) and R2 Sumar Singh (owner of the offending vehicle) has stated that petition as framed was not maintainable as the accident was not caused because of any fault of respondent no. 1, but was caused by deceased/victim, who was driving negligently. It is further stated that offending vehicle was duly insured and respondent no.1 was holding a valid licence at the time of alleged accident and hence, R1& R2 were not liable to compensate the petitioners.
Further, in reply on merits, contents of para 1 to 7, 12 to 14, 20 to 22 have been denied for want of knowledge and the contents of para 8 to 10, 15 to 19, 24 to 26 are stated to be matter of record. Contents of remaining paras of petition have also been denied and it has been prayed that the present petition filed on behalf of the petitioners may be rejected.
4. W.S has also been filed on behalf of R3/ Shriram General Insurance Company Ltd., wherein it has been stated that R3 was not liable to pay any amount to the petitioner as vehicle no. HR 47A 7298 was not insured by the said respondent. It is further stated that R3/Insurance company had not issued any policy to insure the MACP No. 1326/2016 Santosh Devi & Ors. Vs. Ravinder Kumar & Ors. 3/24 4 above said vehicle and alleged proposal form bearing no. JPR3409260 being relied upon by the claimant as well as driver and owner of the offending vehicle have been lost by the respondent company. It is also stated that the petition was incomplete, vague and does not disclose any cause of action against the said respondent no. 3 and that the same was based on concocted facts and have been filed with a view to extort money and as such it was liable to be dismissed.
Further, in reply on merits, the contents of para 1 to 3, 5, 9, 10 to 15 and 21 have been denied for want of knowledge and the contents of para 16, 17 & 20 are stated to be matter of record. The contents of the remaining paras of the petition have been denied on behalf of R3/ insurance company and it has been prayed that the present petition filed on behalf of the petitioners may be dismissed with cost.
5. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed on 19.05.2014 by one of the Ld. Predecessors of this court :
ISSUES :
1. Whether Banwari Lal sustained fatal injuries in a motor vehicle accident dated 10.06.2013 due to rash or negligent driving of vehicle no. HR47A729 by R1 ? ...OPP
2. Whether the petitioners are entitled to claim compensation, if so, what amount and from whom ? ...OPP
3. Relief.
6. In support of their case, petitioners have examined petitioner no. 2 Mahesh Kumar as PW1 and they have also examined PW2 Dr. Pramod Kumar Aggarwal, MD Park hospital, Khyala, New Delhi and PW3 Sh. Vivek Bhardwaj, JA, NDMC, New Delhi in support of their case.
MACP No. 1326/2016 Santosh Devi & Ors. Vs. Ravinder Kumar & Ors. 4/24 5
7. In the instant case, perusal of record reveals that no RE have been led on behalf of the respondents and accordingly, RE on behalf of the respondents was closed vide order dated 17.10.2017 passed by Ld Predecessor of this court.
8. I have heard the arguments put forward by Ld. counsels for the petitioners and R3/ insurance company and have carefully gone through record of the case. I have carefully considered the evidence led by the petitioners in support of their case. I have also carefully perused written submissions filed on behalf of the petitioners and R3/Insurance company.
It is pertinent to mentioned here that the arguments have not been addressed in this case on behalf of R1 Ravinder Kumar and R2 Sumar Singh, despite opportunity being given.
9. The issuewise findings are as under :
10 ISSUE No. 1Whether Banwari Lal sustained fatal injuries in a motor vehicle accident dated 10.06.2013 due to rash or negligent driving of vehicle no. HR47A729 by R1 ? ...OPP The onus to prove this issue was upon the petitioners and in order to discharge the said onus , the petitioners have examined PW1 Mahesh Kumar, who has filed his evidence by way of affidavit (Ex. PW1/A), wherein it has been stated that on 09.06.2013, he alongwith his father Sh. Banwari Lal had gone to Jaipur to meet their family members on their motorcycle bearing no. DL 98X2735 and on
10.06.2013, he was returning with his father from Jaipur on the abovesaid motorcycle and when they reached near Chanduwas Pull (JaipurDelhi Highway), a MACP No. 1326/2016 Santosh Devi & Ors. Vs. Ravinder Kumar & Ors. 5/24 6 Tata Cantre bearing no. HR 47A 7298 being driven by respondent no. 1 at a very high speed rashly, negligently and in violation of the traffic rules, hit their motorcycle and ran away. PW1 further deposed that due to the impact, he and his father Banwari Lal fell down on the road and his father, who was driving the abovesaid motor cycle, sustained serious injuries and was immediately rushed to Life Care Hospital, Rewari by the police and from that hospital, because of serious injuries, his father was brought to Park hospital, Keshopur, Delhi and was admitted in ICU, where ultimately he died on 18.06.2013 due to the injuries sustained by him in the accident. PW1 also deposed that as a result of negligence on the part of driver (R1) of abovesaid Canter bearing no. HR47A7298, his father received injuries and died untimely death.
The important fact is that this eye witness to the accident i.e PW1 Mahesh Kumar was cross examined on behalf respondent no.3/ insurance company, but nothing material has come on record which could assail the credibility or trustworthiness of this witness.
In his cross examination by the Ld. counsel for R3/Insurance company, PW1 stated that the offending vehicle had hit their motorcycle from behind and as a result of the impact, he also received some injuries. PW1 denied the suggestion that the accident had occurred due to negligence of deceased or that he was deposing falsely. In these circumstances, nothing material has come on record which could shake the credibility of this witness qua his deposition regarding the manner in which the accident was caused in this case.
Hence, in view of the above discussion & observations and having regard to the fact and circumstances of the present case, it is evident that deceased Sh. Banwari Lal sustained fatal injuries and died in a motor vehicle accident dated 10.06.2013 due to rash or negligent driving of vehicle no. HR47A7298, which was MACP No. 1326/2016 Santosh Devi & Ors. Vs. Ravinder Kumar & Ors. 6/24 7 being driven by R1 Ravinder Kumar, owned by R2 Sumar Singh and insured with R3/ Shriram General Insurance Company Ltd. at the time of accident.
Accordingly, issue no.1 is decided in favour of the petitioners and against the respondents.
11. ISSUE No. 2Whether the petitioners are entitled to claim compensation, if so, what amount and from whom ? ...OPP The onus to prove this issue was upon the petitioners and in order to discharge the said onus the petitioners have examined PW1 Mahesh Kumar (petitioner no.2), who has filed his evidence by way of affidavit (Ex. PW1/A), wherein it has been stated that after accident, his father was rushed to Life Care hospital by the police ambulance and on account of serious injuries, his father was brought to Park hospital, Keshopur, New Delhi and was admitted in ICU, however despite the treatment, his father could not be saved and was declared dead on 17.06.2013. PW1 further deposed that due to negligence on the part of R1/driver of the above said Tata Canter, his father died an untimely death leaving behind him, his mother and two brothers and a sister. PW1 deposed that before the untimely death, his father was working as a Supervisor (Fire Maintenance Staff), New Delhi Municipal Corporation and was drawing the salary of about Rs.27,376/pm and all of them were totally surviving upon his deceased father. PW1 further deposed that due to unfortunate accident and death of his father, life of his family members have been crippled and they were unable to cope with the expenses. PW1 also deposed that they have spent money on the medicines, treatment, conveyance etc in respect of the treatment of his father and some of those bills have been filed on record.
PW1 has proved the FIR and final report as Ex. PW1/1 and Ex.
MACP No. 1326/2016 Santosh Devi & Ors. Vs. Ravinder Kumar & Ors. 7/24 8 PW1/2 ( colly. ). He has further proved the treatment record as Ex. PW1/3 ( colly.), postmortem report as Ex. PW1/4 and death certificate as Ex. PW1/5. PW1 has also proved DL of R1 , RC of offending vehicle, cover note of insurance and salary slip of deceased as Ex. PW1/6 to Ex. PW1/9 respectively.
Hence, in view of the above and in view of the material and evidence record, it is clear that deceased Sh. Banwari Lal sustained fatal injuries and died in a motor vehicle accident 10.06.2013 due to rash or negligent driving of vehicle no. HR47A7298, which was being driven by R1 Ravinder Kumar, owned by R2 Sumar Singh and insured with R3/ Shriram General Insurance Company Ltd. at the time of accident and as such petitioners, being the LRs of the deceasedSh. Banwari Lal have become entitled to claim compensation for the death of said deceased in the abovesaid accident.
Quantum of compensation payable to the petitioners/LRs of deceased Smt. Poonam is ascertained under the following heads:
12. AGE & MULTIPLIER As per his driving licence and other documents on record , the date of birth of the deceased Banwari Lal was 17.4.1966 and as such, he was about 47 years of age at the time of accident on 10.6.2013. Hence, the multiplier of '13' is taken in this case.
13. LOSS OF DEPENDENCY In the present case, in view of the material/evidence on record, it is evident that at the time of accident, the deceased Banwari Lal was married and has left behind five LRs i.e. Smt. Santosh ( wife ), Mahesh Kumar ( son ), Ms.Durgesh Kumari ( daughter ), Dinesh Kumar ( son ) and Pawan Kumar ( son ). In these MACP No. 1326/2016 Santosh Devi & Ors. Vs. Ravinder Kumar & Ors. 8/24 9 circumstances, in view of the law/guidelines laid down in the case titled as 'Sarla Verma & Ors. Vs. DTC & Anr' [ reported as (2009 )6SCC 121] , one fourth ( ¼th ) of the income of the deceased is liable to be deducted from his total income towards personal and living expenses of the deceased.
In view of the above and in view of the material on record, the annual contribution of the deceased to the family multiplied by a multiplier as per above guidelines shall give the loss of dependency to the entire family.
In the instant case, PW1 Mahesh Kumar ( son /LR of deceased) deposed that before the untimely death, his father was working as a Supervisor (Fire Maintenance Staff), New Delhi Municipal Corporation and was drawing the salary of about Rs.27,376/pm and all of them were totally surviving upon his deceased father. Further, PW3 Sh. Vivek Bhardwaj Jr. Asstt. Secretary Establishment Branch, NDMC, New Delhi has also produced the summoned record i.e. salary slip of deceased Banwari lal Dhanka of May 2013 and has proved the same as Ex. PW3/A and as per the said salary slip, deceased Banwari Lal was getting a salary of Rs. 27,376/ p.m at the time of his death in the accident in this case and as such, the loss of dependency to the family on account of the death of the deceased can be calculated as under:
a) Salary of the deceased Banwari Lal : Rs. 27,376/ p.m
b) 50% addition towards future prospects : Rs. 13,688/
c) 1/4th deduction towards on personal and living expenses of deceased. : Rs. 10,266/
d) Monthly loss of dependency (Rs. 27,376/ + Rs.13,688/ : Rs. 30,798/ Rs. 10,266/) MACP No. 1326/2016 Santosh Devi & Ors. Vs. Ravinder Kumar & Ors. 9/24 10
e) Annual loss of dependency to the family due to death of deceased : Rs. 3,69,576/ (Rs. 30,798/ x 12)
f) Total loss of dependency to the family due to death of deceased ( Rs.3,69,576 / x 13) : Rs.48,04,488/ Hence, in view of the above, the total loss of dependency to the family on account of death of the deceased Sh.Banwari Lal comes to Rs. 48,04,488 / and as such, the petitioners shall be entitled to the said amount i.e Rs. 48,04,488 / (Rupees Forty Eight Lacs, Four Thousand, Four Hundred Eighty Eight only) as compensation under the head 'loss of dependency'.
14. MEDICAL EXPENSES In the present case, in view of the material/evidence on record, it is evident that after the accident on 10.6.2013, Sh. Banwari Lal ( since deceased) was rushed to Life Care Hospital, Rewari by the police and from that hospital because of serious injuries, he was brought to Park hospital, Keshopur, Delhi and was admitted in ICU, where ultimately he died on 18.06.2013 due to the injuries sustained by him in the accident. In this regard, PW1 has proved the medical and treatment bills amounting to Rs. 34,950/pertaining to the abovesaid hospitals. There is no reason to doubt the said bills. In these circumstances and in view of the material on record, the petitioners are entitled to a sum of Rs. 34,950 / (Rupees Thirty Four Thousand, Nine Hundred Fifty Only ) towards medical expenses of the deceased.
15. LOSS OF ESTATE In terms of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the MACP No. 1326/2016 Santosh Devi & Ors. Vs. Ravinder Kumar & Ors. 10/24 11 case titled as ' National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi & Ors. ( reported as 2017 SCC OnLine SC 1720), a sum of Rs. 15,000/ is awarded towards the head 'loss of estate'.
16. FUNERAL EXPENSES Further, in terms of the law /guidelines laid down in the case National Insurance Co. Ltd Vs. Pranay Sethi ( supra), a sum of Rs. 15,000/ is awarded to the petitioners towards ' funeral expenses'.
17. LOSS OF CONSORTIUM Further, in terms of the law /guidelines laid down in the case National Insurance Co. Ltd Vs. Pranay Sethi ( supra), a sum of Rs.40,000/ is awarded to the petitioner no.1 Smt.Santosh Devi (wife of the deceased) towards 'loss of consortium'.
18. The break up of compensation that has been awarded in favour of the petitioners have been tabulated as below : S. No. HEAD AMOUNT
1. Loss of dependency Rs.48,04,488 /
2. Medical expenses Rs. 34,950/
3. Loss of consortium Rs.40,000/
4. For funeral expenses Rs.15,000/
5. Loss of estate Rs.15,000/ TOTAL Rs.49,09,438/ rounded of Rs. 49,10,000/ MACP No. 1326/2016 Santosh Devi & Ors. Vs. Ravinder Kumar & Ors. 11/24 12
19. INTEREST In the instant case, there is nothing on record, which could justify the withholding of interest on the award amount. In these circumstances and having regard to the fact and circumstances of the present case, it will be just and proper to award interest @ 9% per annum on the award amount in this case. Hence, the petitioners are awarded interest @ 9% per annum on the abovesaid compensation / award amount i.e Rs. 49,10,000/ from the date of filing of petition i.e. 14.12.2013 till realization.
20. LIABILITY The offending vehicle was being driven by R1 Ravinder Kumar, owned by R2 Sumar Singh and insured with R3 Shriram General Insurance Company Ltd. at the time of accident and as such, respondent no. 3/Shriram General Insurance Company Ltd, being the 'principal tort feasor', shall be liable to pay the awarded amount.
Hence, in view of the above, Issue no. 2 is decided accordingly.
21 RELIEF Thus in view of the above discussion & observations and having regard to the fact and circumstances of the present case, an award for a sum of Rs.49,10,000 / (Rupees Forty Nine Lacs, Ten Thousand only) alongwith interest @ 9% p.a from the date of filing of the petition i.e 14.12.2013 till realization is passed in favour of the petitioners herein and against the respondents. The said compensation amount shall be payable by the respondent no.3/ Shriram General Insurance Company Ltd.
MACP No. 1326/2016 Santosh Devi & Ors. Vs. Ravinder Kumar & Ors. 12/24 13
22. APPORTIONMENT The abovesaid award amount i.e Rs. 49,10,000 / (Rupees Forty Nine Lacs, Ten Thousand only) shall be apportioned amongst the LRs of the deceased Sh. Banwari Lal in the following manner with proportionate interest .
S. No. Name of the petitioner/relation with deceased Amount
1. Petitioner no.1 Smt. Santosh Devi ( wife) Rs.21,10,000/
2. Petitioner no.2 Mahesh Kumar ( son) Rs. 7,00,000/
3. Petitioner no. 3 Ms. Durgesh Kumari ( daughter) Rs. 7,00,000/
4. Petitioner no.4 Dinesh Kumar ( son) Rs. 7,00,000/
5. Petitioner no.5 Pawan Kumar ( son) Rs. 7,00,000/ Total Rs. 49,10,000 /
23. FORMIVA SUMMARY OF THE COMPUTATION OF AWARD AMOUNT IN DEATH CASES TO BE INCORPORATED IN THE AWARD
i) Date of accident : 10.6.2013
ii). Name of the deceased : Sh. Banwari Lal
iii). Age of the deceased : 47 years ( at the time of accident)
iv). Occupation of the deceased: Supervisor (Fire Maintenance Staff) NDMC
v). Income of the deceased : Rs. 27,376/
vi). Name , age and relationship of legal representative of deceased S.No. Name Age Relation with deceased
(i) Smt. Santosh Devi 46 years Wife
(ii) Mahesh Kumar 30 years Son MACP No. 1326/2016 Santosh Devi & Ors. Vs. Ravinder Kumar & Ors. 13/24 14
(iii) Durgesh Kumari 23 years Daughter
(iv) Dinesh Kumar 25 years Son
(v) Pawan Kumar 22 years Son Computation of Compensation S. No. Heads Awarded by the Claims Tribunal
7. Income of the deceased (A) Rs. 27,376/per month
8. AddFuture Prospects (B) Rs. 13,688/
9. LessPersonal expenses of the deceased (C) Rs. 10,266/
10. Monthly loss of dependency Rs. 30,798/ [ (A+B)C=D]
11. Annual Loss of dependency ( D x12) Rs 3,69,576/ 12. Multiplier (E) 13
13. Total loss of dependency (D x 12x E=F) Rs. 48,04,488/
14. Medical Expenses (G) Rs. 34,950/
15. Compensation for loss of love and affection (H)
16. Compensation for loss of consortium (I) Rs. 40,000/
17. Compensation for loss of estate (J) Rs. 15,000/
18. Compensation towards funeral expenses (K) Rs. 15,000/
19. TOTAL COMPENSATION Rs. 49,09,438/ rounded of (F+G+H+I+J+K=L) Rs. 49,10,000/
20. RATE OF INTEREST AWARDED
21. Interest amount up to the date of award (M) @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of petition i.e. 14.12.2013 till realization.
22. Total amount including interest ( L+M) Rs. 49,10,000/ + @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of petition i.e. 14.12.2013 till realization.
23. Award amount released As per table given below
24. Award amount kept in FDRs As per table given below MACP No. 1326/2016 Santosh Devi & Ors. Vs. Ravinder Kumar & Ors. 14/24 15
25. Mode of disbursement of the award amount to By credit in the SB Account of the claimant (s) (Clause 29) the petitioners
26. Next Date for compliance of the award. 25.8.2018 ( Clause 31)
24. In the instant case, the award amount shall be deposited /transferred by respondent no. 3/ Shriram General Insurance Company Ltd in the Account No. 37665510911 of 'MACT (SouthWest), Dwarka Courts, New Delhi ' at State Bank of India, District Court Complex, Sector10, Dwarka New Delhi, (IFSC Code SBIN0011566 and MICR Code 110002483) by RTGS/NEFT/IMPS under intimation, with proof of notice to the claimant/petitioner and his counsel, to the Nazir of this court .
Further, the statement of petitioner/LRs of the deceased regarding their financial status, needs and liabilities have also been recorded in this case. In view of the said statement of the petitioner/LRs of the deceased & having regard to facts and circumstances of the present case, the award amount be distributed as follows: S.No Name Status Amount of Release Amount of Period Award Amount Rs. FDR of FDR
1. Santosh Devi Wife Rs. 21,10,000/ Rs. 2,10,000/ Rs. 1,90,000/ 1 year Rs. 1,90,000/ 2 years Rs. 1,90,000/ 3 years Rs. 1,90,000/ 4 years Rs. 1,90,000/ 5 years Rs. 1,90,000/ 6 years Rs. 1,90,000/ 7 years Rs. 1,90,000/ 8 years Rs. 1,90,000/ 9 years Rs. 1,90,000/ 10 years MACP No. 1326/2016 Santosh Devi & Ors. Vs. Ravinder Kumar & Ors. 15/24 16
2. Mahesh Kumar Son Rs. 7,00,000/ Rs. 70,000/ Rs. 63,000/ 1 year Rs. 63,000/ 2 years Rs. 63,000/ 3 years Rs. 63,000/ 4 years Rs. 63,000/ 5 years Rs. 63,000/ 6 years Rs. 63,000/ 7 years Rs. 63,000/ 8 years Rs. 63,000/ 9 years Rs. 63,000/ 10 years
3. Durgesh Kumari Daughter Rs. 7,00,000/ Rs. 70,000/ Rs. 63,000/ 1 year Rs. 63,000/ 2 years Rs. 63,000/ 3 years Rs. 63,000/ 4 years Rs. 63,000/ 5 years Rs. 63,000/ 6 years Rs. 63,000/ 7 years Rs. 63,000/ 8 years Rs. 63,000/ 9 years Rs. 63,000/ 10 years
4. Dinesh Kumar Son Rs. 7,00,000/ Rs. 70,000/ Rs. 63,000/ 1 year Rs. 63,000/ 2 years Rs. 63,000/ 3 years Rs. 63,000/ 4 years Rs. 63,000/ 5 years Rs. 63,000/ 6 years Rs. 63,000/ 7 years Rs. 63,000/ 8 years Rs. 63,000/ 9 years Rs. 63,000/ 10 years
5. Pawan Kumar Son Rs. 7,00,000/ Rs. 70,000/ Rs. 63,000/ 1 year Rs. 63,000/ 2 years MACP No. 1326/2016 Santosh Devi & Ors. Vs. Ravinder Kumar & Ors. 16/24 17 Rs. 63,000/ 3 years Rs. 63,000/ 4 years Rs. 63,000/ 5 years Rs. 63,000/ 6 years Rs. 63,000/ 7 years Rs. 63,000/ 8 years Rs. 63,000/ 9 years Rs. 63,000/ 10 years
25. Petitioner no.1 - Santosh Devi has stated that she is having a SB Account No. 46260100011875 at Bank of Baroda, Mahavir Enclave, New Delhi ( IFSC Code: BARB0MAHDEL ) and it is being requested on her behalf that the abovesaid cash amount/FDRs may be transferred to the said SB Account .
Accordingly, the Manager, State Bank of India, District Courts Complex,Sector10, Dwarka, New Delhi is directed to transfer the abovesaid cash amount and FDRs to the abovesaid SB Account No. 46260100011875 of petitioner no.1 Santosh Devi at Bank of Baroda, Mahavir Enclave, New Delhi , as prayed.
Manager, Bank of Baroda, Mahavir Enclave, New Delhi is directed to release the abovesaid cash amount of Rs. 2,10,000/ to petitioner no.1 Santosh Devi as per rules and to keep the remaining amount in the form of above mentioned FDRs , as prayed.
At the time of maturity, the fixed deposit amount shall be credited in the aforesaid savings bank account of petitioner/injured.
All the original FDRs shall be retained by the concerned bank, however, the statement containing FDR number, amount, date of maturity and MACP No. 1326/2016 Santosh Devi & Ors. Vs. Ravinder Kumar & Ors. 17/24 18 maturity amount shall be provided to petitioner/ injured.
Manager, Bank of Baroda, Mahavir Enclave, New Delhi , is directed not to permit premature encashment or loan qua the abovesaid FDRs to the petitioner no.1 Santosh Devi without the prior permission of this court.
Further, the interest on the said FDRs shall be paid monthly by automatic credit of interest in the Saving Accounts of the petitioner no1 Santosh Devi .
The said Bank of Baroda, Mahavir Enclave, New Delhi is also directed not to issue any cheque book and/or debit card to injured and if the same have already been issued, the said bank is directed to cancel the same and make an endorsement on the pass book that no cheque book or debit card shall be issued to petitioner no.1 Santosh Devi .
Bank of Baroda, Mahavir Enclave, New Delhi shall permit account holder Santosh Devi to withdraw money from her abovesaid saving bank account by means of a withdrawal form .
26. Petitioner no.2 - Mahesh Kumar has stated that he is having a SB Account No. 46260100011877 at Bank of Baroda, Mahavir Enclave, New Delhi ( IFSC Code: BARB0MAHDEL) and it is being requested on his behalf that the abovesaid cash amount/FDRs may be transferred to the said SB Account .
Accordingly, the Manager, State Bank of India, District Courts Complex,Sector10, Dwarka, New Delhi is directed to transfer the abovesaid cash amount and FDRs to the abovesaid SB Account No. 46260100011877 of petitioner no. 2 - Mahesh Kumar at Bank of Baroda, Mahavir Enclave, New Delhi , as prayed.
MACP No. 1326/2016 Santosh Devi & Ors. Vs. Ravinder Kumar & Ors. 18/24 19 Manager, Bank of Baroda, Mahavir Enclave, New Delhi is directed to release the abovesaid cash amount of Rs. 70,000/ to petitioner no.2 - Mahesh Kumar as per rules and to keep the remaining amount in the form of above mentioned FDRs , as prayed.
At the time of maturity, the fixed deposit amount shall be credited in the aforesaid savings bank account of petitioner/injured.
All the original FDRs shall be retained by the concerned bank, however, the statement containing FDR number, amount, date of maturity and maturity amount shall be provided to petitioner/ injured.
Manager, Bank of Baroda, Mahavir Enclave, New Delhi , is directed not to permit premature encashment or loan qua the abovesaid FDRs to the petitioner no.2 - Mahesh Kumar without the prior permission of this court.
Further, the interest on the said FDRs shall be paid monthly by automatic credit of interest in the Saving Accounts of the petitioner no.2 - Mahesh Kumar.
The said Bank of Baroda, Mahavir Enclave, New Delhi is also directed not to issue any cheque book and/or debit card to injured and if the same have already been issued, the said bank is directed to cancel the same and make an endorsement on the pass book that no cheque book or debit card shall be issued to petitioner no.2 - Mahesh Kumar .
Bank of Baroda, Mahavir Enclave, New Delhi shall permit account holderMahesh Kumar to withdraw money from his abovesaid saving bank account by means of a withdrawal form .
27. Petitioner no.3 -Durgesh Kumari has stated that she is having a SB MACP No. 1326/2016 Santosh Devi & Ors. Vs. Ravinder Kumar & Ors. 19/24 20 Account No. 46260100011876 at Bank of Baroda, Mahavir Enclave, New Delhi ( IFSC Code: BARB0MAHDEL ) and it is being requested on her behalf that the abovesaid cash amount/FDRs may be transferred to the said SB Account .
Accordingly, the Manager, State Bank of India, District Courts Complex,Sector10, Dwarka, New Delhi is directed to transfer the abovesaid cash amount and FDRs to the abovesaid SB Account No. 46260100011876 of petitioner no. 3 -Durgesh Kumari at Bank of Baroda, Mahavir Enclave, New Delhi, as prayed.
Manager, Bank of Baroda, Mahavir Enclave, New Delhi is directed to release the abovesaid cash amount of Rs. 70,000/ to petitioner no. 3 -Durgesh Kumari as per rules and to keep the remaining amount in the form of above mentioned FDRs , as prayed.
At the time of maturity, the fixed deposit amount shall be credited in the aforesaid savings bank account of petitioner/injured.
All the original FDRs shall be retained by the concerned bank, however, the statement containing FDR number, amount, date of maturity and maturity amount shall be provided to petitioner/ injured.
Manager, Bank of Baroda, Mahavir Enclave, New Delhi , is directed not to permit premature encashment or loan qua the abovesaid FDRs to the petitioner no. 3 -Durgesh Kumari without the prior permission of this court.
Further, the interest on the said FDRs shall be paid monthly by automatic credit of interest in the Saving Accounts of the petitioner no 3 - Durgesh Kumari .
The said Bank of Baroda, Mahavir Enclave, New Delhi is also directed not to issue any cheque book and/or debit card to injured and if the same have already been issued, the said bank is directed to cancel the same and make an MACP No. 1326/2016 Santosh Devi & Ors. Vs. Ravinder Kumar & Ors. 20/24 21 endorsement on the pass book that no cheque book or debit card shall be issued to petitioner no. 3 -Durgesh Kumari .
Bank of Baroda, Mahavir Enclave, New Delhi shall permit account holder Durgesh Kumari to withdraw money from her abovesaid saving bank account by means of a withdrawal form .
28. Petitioner no.4 - Dinesh Kumar has stated that he is having a SB Account No. 4626010001887 at Bank of Baroda, Mahavir Enclave, New Delhi ( IFSC Code: BARB0MAHDEL ) and it is being requested on his behalf that the abovesaid cash amount/FDRs may be transferred to the said SB Account .
Accordingly, the Manager, State Bank of India, District Courts Complex,Sector10, Dwarka, New Delhi is directed to transfer the abovesaid cash amount and FDRs to the abovesaid SB Account No. 4626010001887 of petitioner no. 4 - Dinesh Kumar at Bank of Baroda, Mahavir Enclave, New Delhi , as prayed.
Manager, Bank of Baroda, Mahavir Enclave, New Delhi is directed to release the abovesaid cash amount of Rs. 70,000/ to petitioner no. 4 - Dinesh Kumar as per rules and to keep the remaining amount in the form of above mentioned FDRs , as prayed.
At the time of maturity, the fixed deposit amount shall be credited in the aforesaid savings bank account of petitioner/injured.
All the original FDRs shall be retained by the concerned bank, however, the statement containing FDR number, amount, date of maturity and maturity amount shall be provided to petitioner/ injured.
Manager, Bank of Baroda, Mahavir Enclave, New Delhi , is directed not MACP No. 1326/2016 Santosh Devi & Ors. Vs. Ravinder Kumar & Ors. 21/24 22 to permit premature encashment or loan qua the abovesaid FDRs to the petitioner no. 4 - Dinesh Kumar without the prior permission of this court.
Further, the interest on the said FDRs shall be paid monthly by automatic credit of interest in the Saving Accounts of the petitioner no. 4 - Dinesh Kumar .
The said Bank of Baroda, Mahavir Enclave, New Delhi is also directed not to issue any cheque book and/or debit card to injured and if the same have already been issued, the said bank is directed to cancel the same and make an endorsement on the pass book that no cheque book or debit card shall be issued to petitioner no. 4 - Dinesh Kumar .
Bank of Baroda, Mahavir Enclave, New Delhi shall permit account holder Dinesh Kumar to withdraw money from his abovesaid saving bank account by means of a withdrawal form .
29. Petitioner no.5 - Pawan Kumar has stated that he is having a SB Account No. 46260100011885 at Bank of Baroda, Mahavir Enclave, New Delhi ( IFSC Code: BARB0MAHDEL ) and it is being requested on his behalf that the abovesaid cash amount/FDRs may be transferred to the said SB Account .
Accordingly, the Manager, State Bank of India, District Courts Complex,Sector10, Dwarka, New Delhi is directed to transfer the abovesaid cash amount and FDRs to the abovesaid SB Account No. 46260100011885 of petitioner no. 5 - Pawan Kumar at Bank of Baroda, Mahavir Enclave, New Delhi, as prayed.
Manager, Bank of Baroda, Mahavir Enclave, New Delhi is directed to release the abovesaid cash amount of Rs. 70,000/ to petitioner no. 5 - Pawan MACP No. 1326/2016 Santosh Devi & Ors. Vs. Ravinder Kumar & Ors. 22/24 23 Kumar as per rules and to keep the remaining amount in the form of above mentioned FDRs , as prayed.
At the time of maturity, the fixed deposit amount shall be credited in the aforesaid savings bank account of petitioner/injured.
All the original FDRs shall be retained by the concerned bank, however, the statement containing FDR number, amount, date of maturity and maturity amount shall be provided to petitioner/ injured.
Manager, Bank of Baroda, Mahavir Enclave, New Delhi , is directed not to permit premature encashment or loan qua the abovesaid FDRs to the petitioner no. 5 - Pawan Kumar without the prior permission of this court.
Further, the interest on the said FDRs shall be paid monthly by automatic credit of interest in the Saving Accounts of the petitioner no. 5 - Pawan Kumar .
The said Bank of Baroda, Mahavir Enclave, New Delhi is also directed not to issue any cheque book and/or debit card to injured and if the same have already been issued, the said bank is directed to cancel the same and make an endorsement on the pass book that no cheque book or debit card shall be issued to petitioner no. 5 - Pawan Kumar .
Bank of Baroda, Mahavir Enclave, New Delhi shall permit account holder - Pawan Kumar to withdraw money from his abovesaid saving bank account by means of a withdrawal form .
30. The insurance company shall inform the petitioners as well as their counsel through registered post that the award amount is being transferred/ deposited so as to facilitate the petitioners to know about the deposit in the MACP No. 1326/2016 Santosh Devi & Ors. Vs. Ravinder Kumar & Ors. 23/24 24 account.
Copy of this award be sent to the concerned Manager, SBI, District Courts Complex, Sector 10, Dwarka, New Delhi and Manager, Bank of Baroda, Mahavir Enclave, New Delhi, for information / compliance.
Copy of this award be also given ''Dasti' to the petitioners/ their counsel and Ld. Counsel for the respondent/insurance company.
Ahlmad is directed to prepare a separate misc. file and put up the same for filing of the compliance report on 25.8.2018.
File be consigned to the record room.
(Announced in the open (Paramjit Singh)
Court on 19.7.2018) PO, MACT (SouthWest District)
Dwarka Courts, New Delhi
19.7.2018
Digitally
signed by
PARAMJIT
PARAMJIT SINGH
SINGH Date:
2018.07.19
16:46:04
+0530
MACP No. 1326/2016 Santosh Devi & Ors. Vs. Ravinder Kumar & Ors. 24/24
25
MACP No. 1326/2016 Santosh Devi & Ors. Vs. Ravinder Kumar & Ors. 25/24