Delhi District Court
Sachin Kumar vs Utkarsh Singh on 28 May, 2025
MACT/431/2023
Sachin Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/432/2023
Sanjay @ Sanjay Rathor vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/433/2023
Santosh Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
IN THE COURT OF SHRI SUDESH KUMAR :
PRESIDING OFFICER : MACT : SOUTH DISTT. : SAKET
COURTS : NEW DELHI
Petition No. : 431/2023
CNR NO. DLST01-010673-2023
DLST010106732023
1. Mr. Sachin Kumar
S/o Mr. Raju Shah
R/o Village Rozza Jallalpur,
Dhoom Singh Market, Greater Noida
Uttar Pradesh.
Also at Gram Raghunathpur, Post-Mirpur,
Rampur, East Champaran Rampur,
Bihar - 845415. ......injured
Petition No. : 432/2023
CNR NO. DLST01-010672-2023
DLST010106722023
1. Mr. Sanjay @ Sanjay Rathor
S/o Mr. Rambaran
R/o A-1288, Gharoli Dairy Colony,
Mayur Vihar Phase-3,
Page No.1/43
MACT/431/2023
Sachin Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/432/2023
Sanjay @ Sanjay Rathor vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/433/2023
Santosh Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
East Delhi - 110096. .......injured
Petition No. : 433/2023
CNR NO. DLST01-010640-2023
DLST010106402023
1. Mr. Santosh Kumar
S/o Mr. Shubh Narayan Sah
R/o M-I-519, Gali No. 8,
Ground Floor, Sangam Vihar,
Devli, South Delhi. .......injured
...... Petitioners
Versus
1. Mr. Utkarsh Singh
S/o Mr. Kuldeep Singh
R/o A-405, I R W O, Rail Vihar
Society, P.S. Beeta-2, Greater Noida,
Distt. Gautam Budh Nagar,
UP ..... (driver)
2. Ms. Shristi Saini
D/o Mr. Anil Kumar
R/o H.No. -17, Gautam Nagar
Andrewsganj, South Delhi. ....(Owner)
3. ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Ltd.
4th Floor, Redfort Capital Parsvnath Tower
Bhai Veer Singh Marg, Gol Market,
New Delhi. ......(Insurance company)
......Respondents
Page No.2/43
MACT/431/2023
Sachin Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/432/2023
Sanjay @ Sanjay Rathor vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/433/2023
Santosh Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
Date of Institution : 13.10.2023
Date of reserving of
judgment/order : 28.05.2025
Date of pronouncement : 28.05.2025
JUDGMENT:
1. These are the three separate claim petitions filed by injured persons namely Sachin Kumar, Sanjay @ Sanjay Rathor and Santosh Kumar. All the three petitions have arisen out of the same accident. The petitioners have filed the claim petitions for compensation under Section 166 & 140 of the Motor Vehicle act, 1988 (hereinafter referred as 'the Act') for the injuries sustained by them in a road accident that occurred on 12.05.2023 at about 10.10 AM opposite Bloom International School Roza, Jalapur, Noida due to rash and negligent driving of Creta Car bearing no. DL-3CCU-7465 by the respondent no. 1 which was owned by respondent no. 2 and insured with the respondent no. 3. The injured Sachin Kumar has claimed Rs.50,00,000/-, injured Sanjay @ Sanjay Rathor has claimed Rs.80,00,000/- and injured Santosh Kumar has claimed Rs.80,00,000/- as compensation.
2. The brief facts as per the petitions are that on 12.05.2023 the petitioners namely Sachin Kumar, Sanjay, and Santosh Kumar were going to Delhi in a tempo bearing no. UP-16T-2272 which was being driven by Sanjay at a normal Page No.3/43 MACT/431/2023 Sachin Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/432/2023 Sanjay @ Sanjay Rathor vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/433/2023 Santosh Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
speed and on correct side of the road. When they reached opposite Bloom International School Roza-Jalalpur, Noida, in the meantime one vehicle bearing no. DL-3CCU-7465 which was being driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner came from opposite/ wrong side and hit their tempo with a great force. Due to the said impact, all the petitioners sustained grievous injuries. As a result thereof, the claimant Sachin has suffered 20% permanent physical impairment in respect of his Right Lower Limb, claimant Sanjay has suffered 58% permanent physical impairment in respect of his Both Lower Limbs and claimant Sanotsh Kumar has suffered 83% permanent physical impairment in respect of his Both Lower Limbs.
3. Notice of the petitions were issued to the respondents. Pursuant to notice, the respondents filed their written statements.
4. Joint written statement was filed on behalf of the respondent no.(s) 1 and 2 submitting that they are not liable to pay any compensation to the petitioners whatsoever as the vehicle was insured with ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Ltd. for the period from 06.10.2021 to 05.10.2024 at the time of accident. The road on which the accident happened was a single lane and according to the mechanical inspection report of the car 'the car was damaged from the right side' which means car was on the correct side of the road.
Page No.4/43MACT/431/2023 Sachin Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/432/2023 Sanjay @ Sanjay Rathor vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/433/2023 Santosh Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
5. The respondent no. 3/insurance company has contested the claim inter-alia stating that the accident has occurred due to the negligence of injured Sanjay who was driving Tempo bearing no. UP-16AT-2272. It is averred that the FIR has been lodged in collusion with the respondent no.(s) 1 and 2 and the police. The respondent no. 3 has been falsely implicated with an afterthought of the claim. However, it is admitted that the offending vehicle bearing no. DL-3CCU-7465 was insured vide policy no. 3001/228505569/00/000 with effect from 06.10.2021 to 05.10.2024 in favour of Ms. Shristi Saini/ respondent no. 2.
6. After the pleadings following issues were framed vide order dated 01.06.2024 :
◦ Whether Sachin Kumar, Sanjay & Santosh Kumar sustained injuries in the road accident on 12.05.2023 at about 10:10 AM opposite Bloom International School Roza, Jalapur, Noida due to rash and negligent driving of Creta bearing no. DL-3CCU-7465 being driven by respondent no. 1, owned by respondent no. 2 and insured with respondent no. 3 (ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Ltd.) ? (OPP) ◦ To what amount of compensation, the petitioners are entitled and from whom?OPP ◦ Relief.
7. Thereafter the matter was referred to Local Commissioner for recording of evidence. Ld. Local Page No.5/43 MACT/431/2023 Sachin Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/432/2023 Sanjay @ Sanjay Rathor vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/433/2023 Santosh Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
Commissioner after recording the evidence filed his report.
8. I have heard Ld. Counsels for the parties and have carefully perused the court record. As all the three claim petitions arise out of the same accident, the claim petitions stand consolidated for the purposes of evidence.
My findings on the issues are as under:-
ISSUE NO. 19. In a claim petition, onus is on the claimants/ petitioners to prove that they have suffered grievous injuries in the vehicular accident caused by the wrongful act or negligence of the driver of the offending vehicle.
10. All the petitions were consolidated for the purpose of evidence.
11. In order to establish their claims, the injured persons examined themselves as PW1 to PW3.
12. The respondents have not examined any witness despite opportunities being given.
Page No.6/43MACT/431/2023 Sachin Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/432/2023 Sanjay @ Sanjay Rathor vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/433/2023 Santosh Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
13. Injured Santosh Kumar (MACT/433/2023) was examined as PW1 who deposed that on 12.05.2023 he was going to Delhi alongwith other persons namely Sahil Kumar, Sachin Kumar and Sanjay Rathor by the Tempo bearing no. UP-16AT-2272 which was being driven by Sanjay @ Sanjay Rathor at a very normal speed. When they reached opposite Bloom International School Rouza Jalalpur, Noida in the meantime one Creta car bearing no. DL-3CCU-7465 came in a rash and negligent manner and hit their tempo with a great force. The driver of the car fled away from the spot and number plate was found on the spot. He was immediately taken to the Numed Super Specialty Hospital, Sector -3, Greater Noida West, UP where his MLC was prepared and thereafter he was taken to Jai Prakash Apex Trauma Centre, AIIMS Hospital, New Delhi where he remained hospitalized from 12.05.2023 to 13.06.2023. At the time of accident, he was 25 years old and used to sale food items on Rehadi near AIIMS Hospital, New Delhi and was earning Rs.30,000/- per month approx. Due to this accident, he has suffered disability and unable to do any work. He has relied upon the following documents in support of his contentions :-
• Photocopy of aadhar as Ex.PW1/1 (OSR). • Educational certificate as Ex.PW1/2 (OSR). • Original treatment record as Ex.PW1/3. • Copy of treatment record as Mark A. • Certified copy of FIR as Ex.PW1/4.
In his cross-examination by Mr. Rajesh Singh, Ld Page No.7/43 MACT/431/2023 Sachin Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/432/2023 Sanjay @ Sanjay Rathor vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/433/2023 Santosh Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
counsel for the respondent no(s). 1 and 2, he stated that firstly his statement was recorded at the spot and then they again enquired from him at the hospital. He denied the suggestion that his statement was taken only once on 30.06.2023.
This witness was also cross-examined by Mr. Brijesh Bagga, Ld. counsel for the respondent no. 3 wherein he stated that he has studied upto 10th class. Sachin, Sahil and himself were in the tempo on the date of accident. They were all sitting on the back. He was not aware whether three persons were allowed to travel at the back of the tempo. He admitted that he has not mentioned in affidavit that the tempo was carrying any goods or not at the time of accident. He was not aware of the seating capacity of the tempo. He denied the suggestion that the accident was caused as the tempo bearing no. 2272 was overloaded. He further denied the suggestion that there was no negligence on the part of Creta car bearing no. DL-3CCU-7465 in causing the accident. He denied the suggestion that accident was caused entirely due to the negligence of the driver of tempo bearing no. 2272. He admitted that he has not filed any document pertaining to his income or avocation. He has not received any monetary benefit from my medi-claim policy or government agency etc. for the injuries sustained in the accident.
14. Injured Sachin Kumar (MACT/431/23) was examined as PW2. He deposed on the same lines as of PW1 Santosh Page No.8/43 MACT/431/2023 Sachin Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/432/2023 Sanjay @ Sanjay Rathor vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/433/2023 Santosh Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
Kumar. He further stated that after the accident, he was immediately taken to the Numed Super Specialty Hospital, Sector 3, Greater Noida West, UP where his MLC was prepared by the doctor and thereafter he was taken to Safdarjung Hospital, New Delhi where he was hospitalized from 13.05.2023 to 24.05.2023. He also got his surgery done on 18.05.2023. He has sustained multiple grievous injuries i.e. Open grade 2# rt. Both bone leg W/d DNVD and other multiple grievous injuries . At the time of accident, he was 20 years old and used to work as a fruit seller in Noida, Uttar Pradesh and was earning Rs.25000/-. Due to this accident, he has suffered disability and unable to do any work and now dependent on others for daily routine work. He has relied upon following documents in support of his contentions :-
• Photocopy of aadhar card as Ex.PW2/1. • Copy of marksheet as Ex.PW2/2.
• Original treatment record as Ex.PW2/3 • His disability certificate as Ex.PW2/4.
In his cross-examination by Mr. Rajesh Singh, Ld. Counsel for the respondent no(s). 1 and 2, he stated that the police had taken his statement on the date of accident. After the said date, police never took his statement. He stayed in the Safdarjung Hospital for about 11 days. He denied the suggestion that as per the case diary, his statement was taken on 30.06.2024. He stated that he used to work as a fruit seller on pushcart.Page No.9/43
MACT/431/2023 Sachin Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/432/2023 Sanjay @ Sanjay Rathor vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/433/2023 Santosh Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
This witness was also cross-examined by Mr. Brijesh Bagga, Ld. counsel for the insurance company. He stated that he has studied upto 10th class. He stated that he is not aware of the registration number of tempo. He did not know Sahil, Santosh or Sanjay prior to the accident. He had met them for the first time on the date of accident i.e. 12.05.2023. He denied the suggestion that tempo was empty at the time of accident. He was not carrying any goods when he boarded the tempo. He was not aware how many persons are allowed to travel at the back of the tempo. He admitted that his ID proof Ex.PW2/1 pertains to champaran, Bihar. He has not filed any document to show that he was residing in Delhi or working in Delhi. At the time of accident, he was residing at Greater Noida, Village Rouza Jallapur, UP. He has not paid any amount/ remuneration to the driver of the tempo Mr. Sanjay. He denied the suggestion that the accident was caused as the tempo was overloaded. He denied the suggestion that there was no negligence on the part of White Creta bearing no. DL-3CCU-7465 in causing the accident. He denied the suggestion that the accident was caused entirely due to the negligence of the driver of Tempo. He has not received any monetary benefit from any mediclaim policy or government agency etc for the injuries sustained in the accident.
15. Injured Sanjay (In MACT NO. 432/2023,) was examined as PW3. He deposed on the similar lines as the PW1 Page No.10/43 MACT/431/2023 Sachin Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/432/2023 Sanjay @ Sanjay Rathor vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/433/2023 Santosh Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
and PW2. He further stated that in this accident, he has sustained multiple grievous injuries i.e. RTA Head injury (DBE) # B/L Lower Limb # Shaft Femer RT. Crush injury, RT. Knee injury # B/B LT. Leg. He was immediately taken to the Numed Super Specialty Hospital, Sector 3, Greater Noida West, UP where his MLC was prepared by the doctor and thereafter referred to Heritage Hospital, Uttar Pradesh where he was hospitalized from 12.05.2023 to 02.06.2023. He has got two surgeries in left Tibia, 'right femur rush nail fixation' and also Right Tibia on 23.05.2023 and 26.05.2023. At the time of accident, he was 24 years old and was working as a driver in Delhi and was earning Rs.30,000/- per month. Due to this accident, he has suffered disability and unable to do any work and now dependent on others for daily routine work. Because of this accident he was not able to resume his duty/ work apart from that he has suffered great mental and physical pain, agony and financial loss due to the injuries suffered in the accident. He has relied upon following documents in support of his contentions :-
• Photocopy of aadhar card as Ex.PW3/1. • Copy of driving licence as Ex.PW3/2 • Original treatment record and medical bills as Ex.PW3/3 • Copy of educational certificate as Ex.PW3/4. • Copy of criminal record as Mark 5.
• Disability certificate as Ex.PW3/6. • Photocopy of medical bills as Mark 7 (colly) • MLC and treatment record as Ex.PW3/8 In his cross-examination by Ld. Counsel for the Page No.11/43 MACT/431/2023 Sachin Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/432/2023 Sanjay @ Sanjay Rathor vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/433/2023 Santosh Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
respondent no. 3/Insurance company, he stated that the Tempo he was driving on 12.05.2023 bears registration no. UP-16AT-2272. The owner of the tempo is Anees Ahmed. He admitted that he has not filed document/ permit to show that the tempo bearing no. UP-16AT-2272 was authorised to enter Delhi. As far as he was aware the Tempo bearing no. UP-16AT-2272 was not authorized to enter Delhi neither there was any permit regarding the same. He admitted that the seating capacity for passengers as per the RC was two only, however again said he was not aware of the same. He stated that he has not filed any document / record to show that he was working for gain in Delhi.
16. Ld. Counsel for the petitioners argued forcefully that from the evidence of PWs coupled with the criminal record produced, the petitioners have proved the fact that it was the respondent no. 1 who had caused injuries to the injured persons by his rash and negligent driving.
17. Ld. counsels for the respondents have contended that accident has occurred due to the negligence of the injured persons only.
18. It is a settled legal position that while deciding a petition u/s 166 of the M V Act, the Claims Tribunal has to decide negligence on the touchstone of preponderance of Page No.12/43 MACT/431/2023 Sachin Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/432/2023 Sanjay @ Sanjay Rathor vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/433/2023 Santosh Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
probabilities. Reference in this regard is made to the observations of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Kaushnumma Begum and Others v/s New India Assurance Company Limited, 2001 ACJ 421 SC, wherein it was held that the issue of wrongful act or omission on the part of the driver of motor vehicle involved in the accident is of secondary importance and mere use or involvement of motor vehicle in causing bodily injuries or death to a human being or damage to property would make the petition maintainable u/s 166 & 140 of the M V Act.
19. Nevertheless, it is also a settled legal position that in a claim petition u/s 166 of the M V Act, burden is on the claimants/petitioners to prove negligence. The law to this effect declared in Minu B Mehta Vs. Balkrishna Ramchandra Nayan (1977) 2 SC 441 was reiterated by the Supreme Court in Oriental Insurance Company Limited vs. Meena Variyal 2007 (5) SCC 428, which has been followed by Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in a recent case, New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Devki & Ors., MAC APP 165/2013 decided on 29.02.2016.
20. Certified copies of criminal proceedings filed alongwith it are admissible in evidence and deemed to be correct under Rule 7 of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal Rules, 2008 until proved to be contrary.
Page No.13/43MACT/431/2023 Sachin Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/432/2023 Sanjay @ Sanjay Rathor vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/433/2023 Santosh Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
21. In this regard observations made by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in New India Assurance Company Ltd. vs. Pushpa Rana and Ors. reported in 2007 SCC online DEL 1700 has to be considered wherein it was held that :-
"the wife of the deceased had produced (1) certified copy of criminal record of criminal case in FIR No. 955/2004 pertaining to involvement of the offending vehicle; (2) Criminal record showing completion of investigation of police and issue of charge-sheet under Section 279/304-A IPC against the driver; (3) certified copy of FIR wherein criminal case against the drive was lodged; and (4 ) recover memo and mechanical inspection report of the offending vehicle and vehicle of the deceased. These documents are sufficient proofs to reach the conclusion that the driver was negligent."
22. In the present claims, petitioners have filed certified copy of chargesheet. Charge sheet has been filed against the respondent no.1 driver of the offending vehicle. All the three injured persons had categorically deposed about the manner and occurrence of the accident which was due to rash and negligent driving of the Respondent No.1. The testimony of all the injured persons in the claim petitions has remained unrebutted and uncontroverted. Nothing material has come up in their cross- examination by the respondents. All the three witnesses are supporting the testimony of each other. Investigation conducted by the IO in the present case is also fully supporting the testimony of all the PWs. No other version of the accident is coming up on record except for the one raised by the petitioners.
Page No.14/43MACT/431/2023 Sachin Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/432/2023 Sanjay @ Sanjay Rathor vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/433/2023 Santosh Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
The respondents have not examined any witness in support of their contentions. In the absence of any averment or evidence regarding any mechanical defect in the offending vehicle or any material depicting any negligent/ sudden act or omission on the part of the petitioner, the only inference possible in the given facts and circumstances is that of neglect and default on the part of respondent no. 1 in driving the offending vehicle at the relevant time.
23. Further, it is pertinent to note that the respondent no. 1/ driver of the aforesaid vehicle was the material witness to throw light by testifying as to how and under what circumstances, the accident had taken place. However, he has preferred not to enter into the witness box during the course of the inquiry. Thus, an adverse inference is liable to be drawn against him to the effect that the accident in question occurred due to rash and negligent driving of offending vehicle. The driver did not enter into the witness box to controvert the claim of the petitioner or even to explain the circumstances of accident. He never lodged any complaint to any authority regarding his false implication. Therefore, an adverse inference is drawn against the respondent no.1/driver in terms of judgment of Hon'ble High Court of Delhi passed in the case of Cholamandalam M.S. General Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Kamlesh, reported in 2009 (3) AD (Delhi)
310. Page No.15/43 MACT/431/2023 Sachin Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/432/2023 Sanjay @ Sanjay Rathor vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/433/2023 Santosh Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
24. Ld. counsel for the insurance company in the cross- examination of the PW3 has put a question in regard to the permit of the vehicle to enter into Delhi. However, the same was never argued at the time of final arguments. Even otherwise, the accident in matter has been taken place at Noida, UP.
25. In view of foregoing discussion, it stands proved by preponderance of probability that the aforesaid accident took place due to rash and negligent driving of the Creta Car bearing no. DL-3CCU-7465 and that the said vehicle at that time was being driven by R-1, owned by R-2 and insured with R-3. Hence, this issue is decided in favour of the petitioners and against the respondents.
I S S U E No. 226. Now, the court has to assess as to how much compensation be awarded to the claimants and by whom? First of all the court has to decide as to whom the liability to pay the compensation is fastened.
27. As the offending vehicle was being driven by respondent no. 1, and owned by respondent no.2, so respondent no.1 is primarily liable and respondent no.2 is vicariously liable Page No.16/43 MACT/431/2023 Sachin Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/432/2023 Sanjay @ Sanjay Rathor vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/433/2023 Santosh Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
to compensate the petitioners. It is an admitted position on record that the vehicle was insured with respondent no.3, therefore, respondent no. 3 becomes contractually liable to compensate the petitioners/claimants for the amount.
28. The petitioners have claimed compensation in respect of the injuries sustained by them. In a road accident, a person is entitled to compensation for the pecuniary and non-pecuniary damages.
29. Let me assess the compensation which the claimants are entitled for under different heads.
COMPENSATION FOR THE INJURED SACHIN KUMAR IN MACT NO. 431/2023 MEDICAL EXPENSES :
30. As per the MLC, the petitioner has suffered grievous injuries. The petitioner has filed medical bills to the tune of Rs.1,680/-. Medical bills are in the name of petitioner coincide with the period of treatment. These documents were never disputed. Keeping in view the nature of injuries and bills place on record, I hereby grant a sum of Rs.1,680/- towards medical expenses.
PAIN AND SUFFERINGS AND ENJOYMENT OF LIFE :
Page No.17/43MACT/431/2023 Sachin Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/432/2023 Sanjay @ Sanjay Rathor vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/433/2023 Santosh Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
31. While discussing the criteria to ascertain the compensation for pain and sufferings by victim of vehicular accident, observations of Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in Satya Narain vs. Jai Kisan, FAO No.:709/02, date of decision:
02.02.2007 can be considered:
12. On account of pain and suffering, suffice would it be to note that it is difficult to measure pain and suffering in terms of a money value. However, compensation which has to be paid must bear some objectives co-relation with the pain and suffering.
13. The objective facts relatable to pain and suffering would be :
(a) Nature of injury.
(b) Body part affected.
(c) Duration of the treatment.
Applying the above criteria to the facts of the present case where petitioner/injured has suffered 20% permanent physical impairment in relation to his Right Lower Limb and keeping in view the period of hospitalization and duration of treatment, I am of the opinion that an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- would be just and fair compensation towards his pain and sufferings and enjoyment of life.
SPECIAL DIET, CONVEYANCE AND ATTENDANT CHARGES :
32. In the present case the petitioner has not placed on record any document with regard to his special diet, conveyance and attendant charges. However, considering his medical Page No.18/43 MACT/431/2023 Sachin Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/432/2023 Sanjay @ Sanjay Rathor vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/433/2023 Santosh Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
condition, he must have spent some amount on special diet, conveyance and attendant.
Looking into the injuries, I award Rs.40,000/- to the petitioner/ injured towards his special diet, conveyance and attendant charges.
LOSS OF INCOME
33. The petitioner/ injured Sachin Kumar stated that at the time of accident, he was working as a fruit seller in Noida Uttar Pradesh and was earning Rs.25000/- per month. However, he has not filed any documents neither led any other evidence to show his earnings at the time of accident. As per the aadhar card of the injured, he is a resident of Bihar. He has failed to show any document that he was resident of Noida, UP. The injured has filed his 10th pass certificate. Hence, in the absence of any proof of income the minimum wages of an 'un-skilled worker' in Bihar is taken into consideration which was Rs.10,088/- p.m, same is considered as approximate earning of the injured.
The injuries on the person of petitioner were such that he might have remained out of work for about four months. Hence I award a sum of Rs.40,352/- (Rs.10,088/- x 4) towards loss of income during period of treatment.
FUTURE LOSS OF INCOME ARISING OUT OF THE DISABILITY Page No.19/43 MACT/431/2023 Sachin Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/432/2023 Sanjay @ Sanjay Rathor vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/433/2023 Santosh Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
34. The petitioner had suffered 20% permanent physical impairment in respect of his Right Lower Limb. It was held in the case of "Mohan Soni Vs. Ram Avtar Tomar & Ors. I (2012) ACC 1 (SC)" :-
"In the context of loss of future earning, any physical disability resulting from an accident has to be judged with reference to the nature of work being performed by the person suffering the disability. This is the basic premise and once that is grasped, it clearly follows that the same injury or loss may affect two different persons in different ways. Take the case of a marginal farmer who does his cultivation work himself and ploughs his land with his own two hands; or the puller of a cycle-rickshaw, one of the main means of transport in hundreds of small towns all over the country. The loss of one of the legs either to the marginal farmer or the cycle-rickshaw-puller would be the end of the road insofar as their earning capacity is concerned. But in case of a person engaged in some kind of desk work in an office, the loss of a leg may not have the same effect. The loss of a leg (or for that matter the loss of any limb) to anyone is bound to have very traumatic effects on one's personal, family or social life but the loss of one of the legs to a person working in the office would not interfere with his work/earning capacity in the same degree as in the case of a marginal farmer or a cycle- rickshaw-puller.
The question of loss of earning capacity Page No.20/43 MACT/431/2023 Sachin Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/432/2023 Sanjay @ Sanjay Rathor vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/433/2023 Santosh Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
resulting from amputation of one the legs in the case of a tanker driver was considered by this Court in K. Janardhan v. United India Insurance Company Limited and another, (2008) 8 SCC 518. In that case, a tanker driver suffered serious injuries in a motor accident and as a result, his right leg was amputated upto the knee joint. He made a claim under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923. The Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation held that disability suffered by him as a result of the loss of the leg was 100% and awarded compensation to him on that basis. In appeal, the High Court, like in the present case, referred to the Schedule to the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 and held that the loss of a leg on amputation amounted to reduction in the earning capacity by 60% and, accordingly, reduced the compensation awarded to the tanker driver. This Court set aside the High Court judgment and held that the tanker driver had suffered 100% disability and incapacity in earning his keep as a tanker driver as his right leg was amputated from the knee and, accordingly, restored the order passed by the Commissioner of Workmen's Compensation.
In K. Janardhan this Court also referred to and relied upon an earlier decision of the Court in Pratap Narain Singh Deo v. Srinivas Sabata (1976) 1 SCC 289, in which a carpenter who suffered an amputation of his left arm from the elbow was held to have suffered complete loss of his earning capacity.
Page No.21/43MACT/431/2023 Sachin Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/432/2023 Sanjay @ Sanjay Rathor vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/433/2023 Santosh Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
In a more recent decision in Raj Kumar v. Ajay Kumar and another, (2011) 1 SCC 343, this Court considered in great detail the correlation between the physical disability suffered in an accident and the loss of earning capacity resulting from it. In paragraphs 10, 11 and 13 of the judgment in Raj Kumar, this Court made the following observations:
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, the 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.Page No.22/43
MACT/431/2023 Sachin Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/432/2023 Sanjay @ Sanjay Rathor vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/433/2023 Santosh Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
What requires to be assessed by the Tribunal is the effect of the permanent 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 the 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.
35. In a very recent judgment announced by the Supreme Court of India in case title Sri Anthony alias Anthony Swamy v. The Manging Director, K.S.R.T.C. on 10.06.2020. Hon'ble Supreme Court of India has reiterated the principles set out for grant of compensation in cases of permanent physical functional disability as mentioned above.
36. In the claim petition no. 431/2023, the petitioner has suffered 20% permanent physical impairment in respect of his Right Lower Limb. Having a disability can make it even harder. In such cases, the effect of permanent disability on the earning capacity of the injured has to be assessed first and after assessing Page No.23/43 MACT/431/2023 Sachin Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/432/2023 Sanjay @ Sanjay Rathor vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/433/2023 Santosh Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
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 the earnings. As a matter of rule half of the disability percentage has to be taken as functional disability, therefore, I take his functional disability as 10%. As per the Aadhar Card, the date of birth of the petitioner is 17.02.2004. The accident took place on 12.05.2023. Hence, he was 19 years of age at the time of accident. Taking a multiplier of '18', the future loss of income comes to Rs.14,123/- (Rs.10,088/- + Rs.10,088 x 40/100) x 12 x 18 x 10% = Rs.3,05,056/- I therefore, award Rs.3,05,056/- to the petitioner towards Future Loss of Income on account of permanent disability.
Loss of Amenities :
37. Due to the permanent disability, the petitioner would not be able to participate in the normal activities of his daily life to pursue his talents, recreation interests, hobbies and evocations. The injuries would also have an effect on his social life. I therefore, award Rs.1,00,000/- to the petitioner towards loss of amenities.
The total compensation of the petitioner hence comes out to be :
MEDICAL EXPENSES :Rs.1,680/-
PAIN & SUFFERINGS &
ENJOYMENT OF LIFE :Rs.1,00,000/-
SPECIAL DIET, CONVEYANCE &
Page No.24/43
MACT/431/2023
Sachin Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/432/2023 Sanjay @ Sanjay Rathor vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/433/2023 Santosh Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
ATTENDANT :Rs.40,000/-
LOSS OF INCOME :Rs.40,352/-
FUTURE LOSS OF INCOME :Rs.3,05,056/-
LOSS OF AMENITIES : Rs.1,00,000/-
==========
TOTAL :Rs.5,87,088/-
===========
COMPENSATION FOR THE INJURED SANJAY @ SANJAY RATHOR IN MACT NO. 432/2023 MEDICAL EXPENSES :
38. As per the MLC, the petitioner has suffered grievous injuries. The petitioner has filed medical bills to the tune of Rs.6,21,310/-. Medical bills are in the name of petitioner coincide with the period of treatment. These documents were never disputed. Keeping in view the nature of injuries and bills place on record, I hereby grant a sum of Rs.6,21,310/- towards medical expenses.
PAIN AND SUFFERINGS AND ENJOYMENT OF LIFE :
39. While discussing the criteria to ascertain the compensation for pain and sufferings by victim of vehicular accident, observations of Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in Satya Narain vs. Jai Kisan, FAO No.:709/02, date of decision:
02.02.2007 can be considered:
12. On account of pain and suffering, suffice would it be to note that it is difficult to measure pain and suffering in terms of a money value. However, Page No.25/43 MACT/431/2023 Sachin Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/432/2023 Sanjay @ Sanjay Rathor vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/433/2023 Santosh Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
compensation which has to be paid must bear some objectives co-relation with the pain and suffering.
13. The objective facts relatable to pain and suffering would be :
(a) Nature of injury.
(b) Body part affected.
(c) Duration of the treatment.
Applying the above criteria to the facts of the present case where petitioner/injured has suffered 58% permanent physical impairment in relation to his Both Lower Limbs and keeping in view the period of hospitalization and duration of treatment, I am of the opinion that an amount of Rs.2,00,000/- would be just and fair compensation towards his pain and sufferings and enjoyment of life.
SPECIAL DIET, CONVEYANCE AND ATTENDANT CHARGES :
40. In the present case the petitioner has not placed on record any document with regard to his special diet, conveyance and attendant charges. However, considering his medical condition, he must have spent some amount on special diet, conveyance and attendant.
Looking into the injuries, I award Rs.70,000/- to the petitioner/ injured towards his special diet, conveyance and attendant charges.
Page No.26/43MACT/431/2023 Sachin Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/432/2023 Sanjay @ Sanjay Rathor vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/433/2023 Santosh Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
LOSS OF INCOME
41. The petitioner/ injured Sanjay stated that at the time of accident, he was working as a driver and earning Rs.30,000/- per month. However, he has not filed any documents or led any evidence to show his earnings at the time of accident. As per the aadhar card of the injured, he is a resident of Delhi. Hence, in the absence of any proof of income the minimum wages of an 'unskilled worker' in Delhi is taken into consideration which was Rs.17,234/- p.m as approximate earning of the injured.
The injuries on the person of petitioner were such that he might have remained out of work for about eight months. Hence I award a sum of Rs.1,37,872/- (Rs.17,234/- x 8) towards loss of income during period of treatment.
FUTURE LOSS OF INCOME ARISING OUT OF THE DISABILITY
42. As observed in judgments "Mohan Soni Vs. Ram Avtar Tomar & Ors. I (2012) ACC 1 (SC) and Sri Anthony alias Anthony Swamy v. The Manging Director, K.S.R.T.C., already mentioned in para no(s). 34 and 35, Hon'ble Supreme Court of India has reiterated the principles set out for grant of compensation in cases of permanent physical functional disability.
43. In view of the same, in the present case, the petitioner Page No.27/43 MACT/431/2023 Sachin Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/432/2023 Sanjay @ Sanjay Rathor vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/433/2023 Santosh Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
have suffered 58% permanent impairment in respect of his both lower limbs. Having a disability can make it even harder. In such cases, the effect of permanent disability on the earning capacity of the injured has to be assessed first 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 the earnings. Therefore, I take his functional disability as 35% as the injured Sanjay has suffered disability in his both lower limbs. As per the Aadhar Card, the date of birth of the petitioner is 04.05.2000. The accident took place on 12.05.2023. Hence, he was 23 years of age at the time of accident. Taking a multiplier of '18', the future loss of income comes to Rs.24,127/- (Rs.17,234/- + Rs.17,234 x 40/100) x 12 x 18 x 35% = Rs.18,24,001/- I therefore, award Rs.18,24,001/- to the petitioner towards Future Loss of Income on account of permanent disability.
Loss of Amenities :
44. Due to the permanent disability, the petitioner would not be able to participate in the normal activities of his daily life to pursue his talents, recreation interests, hobbies and evocations.
The injuries would also have an effect on his social life. I therefore, award Rs.2,00,000/- to the petitioner towards loss of amenities.
The total compensation of the petitioner hence comes Page No.28/43 MACT/431/2023 Sachin Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/432/2023 Sanjay @ Sanjay Rathor vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/433/2023 Santosh Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
out to be :
MEDICAL EXPENSES :Rs.6,21,310/-
PAIN & SUFFERINGS &
ENJOYMENT OF LIFE :Rs.2,00,000/-
SPECIAL DIET, CONVEYANCE &
ATTENDANT :Rs.70,000/-
LOSS OF INCOME :Rs.1,37,872/-
FUTURE LOSS OF INCOME :Rs.18,24,001/-
LOSS OF AMENITIES : Rs.2,00,000/-
==========
TOTAL :Rs.30,53,183/-
===========
COMPENSATION FOR THE INJURED SANTOSH KUMAR IN MACT NO. 433/2023 MEDICAL EXPENSES :
45. As per the record, the petitioner has not filed any original medical bills despite reminders for the same being given.
Therefore, no amount can be awarded towards medical expenses.
PAIN AND SUFFERINGS AND ENJOYMENT OF LIFE :
46. While discussing the criteria to ascertain the compensation for pain and sufferings by victim of vehicular accident, observations of Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in Satya Narain vs. Jai Kisan, FAO No.:709/02, date of decision:
02.02.2007 can be considered:
12. On account of pain and suffering, suffice would it be to note that it is difficult to measure pain and Page No.29/43 MACT/431/2023 Sachin Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/432/2023 Sanjay @ Sanjay Rathor vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/433/2023 Santosh Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
suffering in terms of a money value. However, compensation which has to be paid must bear some objectives co-relation with the pain and suffering.
13. The objective facts relatable to pain and suffering would be :
(a) Nature of injury.
(b) Body part affected.
(c) Duration of the treatment.
Applying the above criteria to the facts of the present case where petitioner/injured has suffered 83% permanent physical impairment in relation to his Both Lower Limbs and keeping in view the period of hospitalization and duration of treatment, I am of the opinion that an amount of Rs.3,00,000/- would be just and fair compensation towards his pain and sufferings and enjoyment of life.
SPECIAL DIET, CONVEYANCE AND ATTENDANT CHARGES :
47. In the present case the petitioner has not placed on record any document with regard to his special diet, conveyance and attendant charges. However, considering his medical condition, he must have spent some amount on special diet, conveyance and attendant.
Looking into the injuries, I award Rs.1,00,000/- to the petitioner/ injured towards his special diet, conveyance and attendant charges.
Page No.30/43MACT/431/2023 Sachin Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/432/2023 Sanjay @ Sanjay Rathor vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/433/2023 Santosh Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
LOSS OF INCOME
48. The petitioner/ injured stated that at the time of accident, he used to sell food items on Rehadi near AIIMS Hospital and was earning Rs.30,000/- per month. However, he has not filed any documents or led any evidence to show his earnings at the time of accident. He has filed copy of 10 th Ex.PW1/X-1. As per the aadhar card of the injured, he is the resident of Delhi. Hence, in the absence of any proof of income the minimum wages of an 'unskilled worker' in Delhi is taken into consideration which was Rs.17,234/- p.m, same is considered as approximate earning of the injured.
The injuries on the person of petitioner were such that he might have remained out of work for about ten months. Hence I award a sum of Rs.1,72,340/- (Rs.17,234/- x 10) towards loss of income during period of treatment.
FUTURE LOSS OF INCOME ARISING OUT OF THE DISABILITY
49. The petitioner had suffered 83% permanent physical impairment in respect of his Both Lower Limbs.
50. As already observed in para no.(s) 34 and 35, Hon'ble Supreme Court of India has reiterated the principles set out for grant of compensation in cases of permanent physical functional disability as mentioned above.
Page No.31/43MACT/431/2023 Sachin Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/432/2023 Sanjay @ Sanjay Rathor vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/433/2023 Santosh Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
51. In the present case, the petitioner has suffered 83% permanent physical impairment in respect of his Both Lower Limbs. Having a disability can make it even harder. In such cases, the effect of permanent disability on the earning capacity of the injured has to be assessed first 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 the earnings. Therefore, I take his functional disability as 60% as the injured Santosh has suffered disability in his both lower limbs. As per the Aadhar Card, the date of birth of the petitioner is 25.08.1997. The accident took place on 12.05.2023. Hence, he was 26 years of age at the time of accident. Taking a multiplier of '17', the future loss of income comes to Rs.24,128/- (Rs.17,234/- + Rs.17,234 x 40/100) x 12 x 17 x 60% = Rs.29,53,267/- I therefore, award Rs.29,53,267/- to the petitioner towards Future Loss of Income on account of permanent disability.
Loss of Amenities :
52. Due to the permanent disability, the petitioner would not be able to participate in the normal activities of his daily life to pursue his talents, recreation interests, hobbies and evocations. The injuries would also have an effect on his social life. I therefore, award Rs.2,00,000/- to the petitioner towards loss of Page No.32/43 MACT/431/2023 Sachin Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/432/2023 Sanjay @ Sanjay Rathor vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/433/2023 Santosh Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
amenities.
The total compensation of the petitioner hence comes out to be :
MEDICAL EXPENSES :Nil.
PAIN & SUFFERINGS &
ENJOYMENT OF LIFE :Rs.3,00,000/-
SPECIAL DIET, CONVEYANCE &
ATTENDANT :Rs.1,00,000/-
LOSS OF INCOME :Rs.1,72,340/-
FUTURE LOSS OF INCOME :Rs.29,53,267/-
LOSS OF AMENITIES : Rs.2,00,000/-
==========
TOTAL :Rs.37,25,607/-
===========
RELIEF
53. In view of my findings, In MACT No. 431/23, I award Rs.5,87,088/- (Rupees Five Lakhs Eighty Seven Thousand Eighty Eight only) to the injured Sachin Kumar. In MACT No. 432/2023, I award Rs.30,53,183/- (Rupees Thirty Lakhs Fifty Three Thousand One Hundred Eighty Three only) to the injured Sanjay @ Sanjay Rathor. In MACT no. 433/2023, I award Rs.37,25,607/- (Rupees Thirty Seven Lakhs Twenty Five Thousand Six Hundred Seven only) to the injured Santosh Kumar as compensation alongwith interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing the petitions till its realisation.
Page No.33/43MACT/431/2023 Sachin Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/432/2023 Sanjay @ Sanjay Rathor vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/433/2023 Santosh Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
IN MACT NO. 431/23 Sachin Kumar versus Utkarsh Singh and ors.
54. A sum of Rs.5,87,088/- (Rupees Five Lakhs Eighty Seven Thousand Eighty Eight only) along-with the interest @ 9% p.a. is awarded to the petitioner Sachin Kumar.
Entire amount be released to him in his saving bank account.
IN MACT NO. 432/23 Sanjay @ Sanjay Rathor versus Utkarsh Singh and ors.
55. A sum of Rs.30,53,183/- (Rupees Thirty Lakhs Fifty Three Thousand One Hundred Eighty Three only) along-with the interest @ 9% p.a. is awarded to the petitioner Sanjay @ Sanjay Rathor.
Out of this amount, an amount of Rs.16,00,000/- (Rupees Sixteen Lakhs) is kept in the form of monthly FDR of Rs.30,000/- each. Remaining amount i.e. Rs.14,53,183/- shall be released to him in his bank account near his place of residence.
IN MACT NO. 433/23 Santosh Kumar versus Utkarsh Singh and ors.
56. A sum of Rs.37,25,607/- (Rupees Thirty Seven Lakhs Twenty Five Thousand Six Hundred Seven only) along-with the interest @ 9% p.a. is awarded to the petitioner Santosh Kumar.
Page No.34/43MACT/431/2023 Sachin Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/432/2023 Sanjay @ Sanjay Rathor vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/433/2023 Santosh Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
Out of this amount, an amount of Rs.26,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty Six Lakhs Only) is kept in the form of monthly FDR of Rs.30,000/- each. Remaining amount i.e. Rs.11,25,607/- shall be released to him in his bank account near his place of residence.
Deposition of awarded amount with STATE BANK OF INDIA, Saket Court Branch, New Delhi.
57. In consonance to the idea by which part of the awarded amount is ordered to be kept in fixed deposit / savings account by Hon'ble High Court, respondent no.3/ Insurance company is directed to deposit the awarded amount in favour of the petitioners with State Bank of India, Saket Courts Complex Branch, against account of petitioner within two months from today, failing which respondent no.3 shall be liable to pay future interest @ 12% per annum till realization (for the delayed period).
58. The respondent no.3 is directed to credit the amount directly to the MACT account of State Bank of India, District Court, Saket branch. Details of the bank i.e. IFSC code etc. have been provided to the Ld. counsel for the insurance company.
59. The award amount shall be deposited with State Bank Page No.35/43 MACT/431/2023 Sachin Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/432/2023 Sanjay @ Sanjay Rathor vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/433/2023 Santosh Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
of India, Saket Court Branch, New Delhi by way of RTGS/NEFT/IMPS in account of MACT FUND PARKING A/c 35195787436 IFS Code SBIN0014244 and MICR code 110002342 under intimation to the Nazir alongwith calculation of interest and to the Counsel for the petitioners.
60. MODE OF DISBURSEMENT OF THE AWARD AMOUNT TO THE CLAIMANTS AS PER PROVISIONS OF THE 'MODIFIED CLAIM TRIBUNAL AGREED PROCEDURE'(MCTAP)
61. Upon the aforesaid amount being deposited, the State Bank of India, Saket Court Complex, New Delhi, is directed to keep the awarded amount in the "fixed deposit / saving account'' in the following manner :-
1. The interest on the fixed deposit be paid to the petitioner/claimant by Automatic Credit of interest of their saving bank account with State Bank of India, Saket Court Branch, New Delhi.
2. Withdrawal from the aforesaid account shall be permitted to petitioner/claimant after due verification and the Bank shall issue photo identity Card to claimants / petitioners to facilitate identity.
3. No cheque book be issued to petitioner/claimant without the permission of this Court.
4. The original fixed deposit receipts shall be retained by the Bank in safe custody. However, the original Pass Book shall be given to the petitioner/claimant alongwith the photocopy of the FDR's .
5. The original fixed deposit receipts shall be handed over to Page No.36/43 MACT/431/2023 Sachin Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/432/2023 Sanjay @ Sanjay Rathor vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/433/2023 Santosh Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
petitioner/claimant at the end of the fixed deposit period.
6. No loan, advance or withdrawal shall be allowed on the said fixed deposit receipts without the permission of this Court.
7. Half yearly statement of account be filed by the Bank in this Court.
8. On the request of petitioner/claimant, the Bank shall transfer the Savings Account to any other branch of State Bank of India, according to their convenience.
9. Petitioner/claimant shall furnish all the relevant documents for opening of the Saving Bank Account and Fixed Deposit Account to Branch Manager, State Bank of India, Saket Courts Complex Branch, New Delhi.
10.The bank is also directed to get the nomination form filled by the claimant at the time of preparation of FDRs.
11.The bank is also directed to keep the money received from the respondents in an FDR in the name of the bank till the FDRs are prepared in the name of the claimant, so that the benefit of better interest may be given to the claimant for the said period.
12.The Manager, State Bank of India, District Court Saket branch is directed not to release any amount to the petitioner from this branch, unless ordered by the Tribunal in terms of the order of the Hon'ble High Court in FAO No. 842/2003 and CM Applications No. 32859/2017, 41125-41127/2017 in Rajesh Tyagi & Ors. vs. Jaibir Singh & Ors. dated 09.03.2018. It is made clear that the amount including the maturity amount of the FDRs shall be released to the petitioner through RTGS/NEFT directly in the personal bank account of the petitioner of the bank nearest to his place of residence, the details of which have been given by the petitioner to the Tribunal and same details shall be given by them to the Manager SBI, District Court Saket branch.
DIRECTIONS FOR THE RESPONDENT No. 3 / INSURANCE COMPANY Page No.37/43 MACT/431/2023 Sachin Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/432/2023 Sanjay @ Sanjay Rathor vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/433/2023 Santosh Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
• The Respondent no.3 is directed to file the compliance report of its having deposited the awarded amount with State Bank of India, Saket Court Branch in this Tribunal within two months from today.
• The Respondent no.3 is directed to furnish a copy of this award alongwith the cheque of the awarded amount to the Manager of State Bank of India, Saket Court Branch, so as to facilitate the Manager of State Bank of India, Saket Court Branch to have the identification of the claimant/petitioner in whose favour the award has been passed.
• The Respondent no.3 shall intimate the claimant/petitioner about its having deposited the cheque in favor of the claimant in terms of the award, at the address of the claimant mentioned at the title of the award, so as to facilitate him to withdraw the same.
• Copy of this award / judgment be given to the claimant who is directed to furnish the same to the Manager of State Bank of India, Saket Court Branch for necessary compliance after his having received the notice of the deposit of awarded amount by the respondent no.3. • The case is now fixed for compliance by the respondent no.3/insurance company for 04.08.2025.
Page No.38/43MACT/431/2023 Sachin Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/432/2023 Sanjay @ Sanjay Rathor vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/433/2023 Santosh Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
FORM IV-B SUMMARY OF COMPUTATION OF AWARD AMOUNT QUA THE INJURED YOUNIS Date of accident : 12.05.2023 Name of the injured : Sachin Kumar Age of the injured: 21 Years Nature of injury : Grievous with 20% disability in respect of his right lower limb.
Computation of Compensation
S. Heads Awarded by the
No. Claims Tribunal
1 Pecuniary Loss :
i Expenditure on treatment Rs.1,680/-
ii Expenditure on special diet, conveyance and Rs.40,000/-
attendant
iii Loss of Income during the period of Rs. 40,352/-
treatment
v Any other loss which may require any --
special treatment or aid to the injured for the rest of his life.
2 Non-Pecuniary Loss :
i Compensation for mental and physical shock -- ii Pain and suffering & enjoyment of life Rs.1,00,000/- iii Loss of amenities Rs.1,00,000/- iv Dis-figuration and marriage prospects --
v Loss of marriage prospects --
vi Compensation on account of permanent Rs.3,05,056/-
disability
Page No.39/43
MACT/431/2023
Sachin Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/432/2023 Sanjay @ Sanjay Rathor vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/433/2023 Santosh Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
3 Disability resulting in loss of earning capacity :
(i) Percentage of disability assessed and nature --
of disability as permanent or temporary
(ii) Future Loss of Income ---
4 TOTAL COMPENSATION Rs.5,87,088/-
5 RATE OF INTEREST AWARDED : @9% per annum From the date of filing of petition till actual realization of principal amount awarded. 6 Award amount released Entire amount be released to the injured Sachin Kumar 7 Next date for compliance of the award. 04.08.2025 FORM IV-B SUMMARY OF COMPUTATION OF AWARD AMOUNT QUA THE INJURED SANJAY @ SANJAY RATHOR Date of accident : 12.05.2023 Name of the injured : Sanjay @ Sanjay Rathor Age of the injured: 25 Years Nature of injury : Grievous with 58% disability in respect of his both lower limbs.
Computation of Compensation
S. Heads Awarded by the
No. Claims Tribunal
1 Pecuniary Loss :
i Expenditure on treatment Rs.6,21,310/-
Page No.40/43
MACT/431/2023
Sachin Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/432/2023 Sanjay @ Sanjay Rathor vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/433/2023 Santosh Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
ii Expenditure on special diet, conveyance and Rs.70,000/-
attendant iii Loss of Income during the period of Rs. 1,37,872/-
treatment v Any other loss which may require any --
special treatment or aid to the injured for the rest of his life.
2 Non-Pecuniary Loss :
i Compensation for mental and physical shock -- ii Pain and suffering & enjoyment of life Rs.2,00,000/- iii Loss of amenities Rs.2,00,000/- iv Dis-figuration and marriage prospects --
v Loss of marriage prospects --
vi Compensation on account of permanent Rs.18,24,001/-
disability
3 Disability resulting in loss of earning capacity :
(i) Percentage of disability assessed and nature --
of disability as permanent or temporary
(ii) Future Loss of Income ---
4 TOTAL COMPENSATION Rs.30,53,183/- 5 RATE OF INTEREST AWARDED : @9% per annum From the date of filing of petition till actual realization of principal amount awarded. 6 Award amount released Rs.14,53,183/- plus interest @ 9% p.a. 7 Award amount kept in FDRs Rs.16,00,000/-
8 Mode of disbursement of the award amount Some amount be
to the claimant(s) released to the
petitioners and
remaining be kept in
Page No.41/43
MACT/431/2023
Sachin Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/432/2023 Sanjay @ Sanjay Rathor vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/433/2023 Santosh Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
the form of fixed deposit.
9 Next date for compliance of the award. 04.08.2025 FORM IV-B SUMMARY OF COMPUTATION OF AWARD AMOUNT QUA THE INJURED SANTOSH KUMAR Date of accident : 12.05.2023 Name of the injured : Santosh Kumar Age of the injured: 28 Years Nature of injury : Grievous with 83% disability in respect of his both lower limbs.
Computation of Compensation
S. Heads Awarded by the
No. Claims Tribunal
1 Pecuniary Loss :
i Expenditure on treatment Nil
ii Expenditure on special diet, conveyance and Rs.1,00,000/-
attendant
iii Loss of Income during the period of Rs. 1,72,340/-
treatment
v Any other loss which may require any --
special treatment or aid to the injured for the rest of his life.
2 Non-Pecuniary Loss :
i Compensation for mental and physical shock --Page No.42/43
MACT/431/2023 Sachin Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/432/2023 Sanjay @ Sanjay Rathor vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
MACT/433/2023 Santosh Kumar vs. Utkarsh Singh and ors.
ii Pain and suffering & enjoyment of life Rs.3,00,000/- iii Loss of amenities Rs.2,00,000/- iv Dis-figuration and marriage prospects --
v Loss of marriage prospects --
vi Compensation on account of permanent Rs.29,53,267/-
disability
3 Disability resulting in loss of earning capacity :
(i) Percentage of disability assessed and nature --
of disability as permanent or temporary
(ii) Future Loss of Income ---
4 TOTAL COMPENSATION Rs.37,25,607/- 5 RATE OF INTEREST AWARDED : @9% per annum From the date of filing of petition till actual realization of principal amount awarded. 6 Award amount released Rs.11,25,607/- plus interest @ 9% p.a. 7 Award amount kept in FDRs Rs.26,00,000/-
8 Mode of disbursement of the award amount Some amount be
to the claimant(s) released to the
petitioners and
remaining be kept in
the form of fixed
deposit.
9 Next date for compliance of the award. 04.08.2025
Digitally
signed by
sudesh
sudesh kumar
Pronounced in the open court kumar Date:
2025.05.28
17:02:00
on 28th MAY 2025 +0530
(SUDESH KUMAR)
Presiding Officer : MACT (S)
Saket Courts, New Delhi
Page No.43/43