Delhi District Court
Ruchira Mishra vs . Ranjan Kumar & Ors. on 25 April, 2018
1
IN THE COURT OF SH. PARAMJIT SINGH PO : MACT (SOUTHWEST
DISTRICT), DWARKA COURTS: NEW DELHI
Ruchira Mishra Vs. Ranjan Kumar & Ors.
MACP No. : 269/16
FIR No. 376/14
PS : Dwarka North
Ms. Ruchira Mishra
W/o Sh. Deepak Mishra
R/o Flat No. 319, Kautilya Apartment,
Pocket 2 Sector14, Dwarka,
New Delhi. ... Petitioner
Vs
1. Sh. Ranjan Kumar (Driver)
S/o Sh. Nand Kumar
R/o B239, PhaseIII, JJ Colony,
Sector3, Dwarka,
New Delhi.
2. Sh. Upender Singh
S/o Sh. Shyama Prasad
R/o 860, LIG Flats,
Sector14, Dwarka,
New Delhi.
3 United India Insurance Co. Ltd.
Naraina, New Delhi ... Respondents
Date of institution of the case 28.05.2015
Date on which, judgment have been reserved03.04.2018
Date of pronouncement of judgment 25.04.2018
MACP No. : 269/16 Ruchira Mishra Vs. Ranjan Kumar 1/20
2
FORM V
COMPLIANCE OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE MODIFIED
CLAIMS TRIBUNAL AGREED PROCEDURE TO BE
MENTIONED IN THE AWARD
1 Date of the accident 09.06.2014
2 Date of intimation of the accident by the Investigating Officer to Not clear from record
the Claims Tribunal ( Clause 2)
3 Date of intimation of the accident by the Investigating Officer to Not clear from record
the Insurance Company (Clause 2)
4 Date of filing of Report under Section 173 Cr. PC before the Not clear from record
Metropolitan Magistrate (Clause 10)
5 Date of filing of Detailed Accident Information Report (DAR) 28.05.2015
by the Investigating Officer before Claims Tribunal. (Clause 10)
6 Date of service of DAR on the Insurance Company. (Clause 11) 28.05.2015
7 Date of service of DAR on the claimant (s). (Clause 11) 28.05.2015
8 Whether DAR was complete in all respects? (Clause 16) Yes
9 If not, whether deficiencies in the DAR removed later on? N.A
10 Whether the police has verified the documents filed with DAR? Yes
(Clause 4)
11 Whether there was any delay or deficiency on the part of the No
Investigating Officer? If so, whether any action / direction
warranted?
12 Date of appointment of the Designated Officer by the Insurance Not clear from record.
company ( Clause 20 )
13 Name, address and contact number of the Designated Officer of Ms. Lipika Kalra, Senior
the Insurance Company ( Clause 20 ) Divisional Manager,United
India Insurance Co.
14 Whether the Designated Officer of the Insurance Company Yes
submitted his report within 30 days of the DAR? ( Clause 22 )
15 Whether the Insurance Company admitted the liability? If so, No.
whether the Designated Officer of the Insurance Company fairly
computed the compensation in accordance with law ( Clause 23 )
MACP No. : 269/16 Ruchira Mishra Vs. Ranjan Kumar 2/20
3
16 Whether there was any delay or deficiency on the part of the No
Designated Officer of the Insurance Company? If so, whether
any action / directions warranted?
17 Date of response of the claimant (s) to the offer of the Insurance NA
Company. ( Clause 24)
18 Date of Award 25.04.2018
19 Whether the award was passed with the consent of the parties? No
( Clause 22)
20 Whether the claimant (s) were directed to open savings bank Yes
accounts (s) near their place of residence ? ( Clause 18)
21 Date of order by which claimant(s) were directed to open
savings bank accounts(s) near his place of residence and produce
PAN Card and Adhaar Card and the direction to the bank not
issue any cheque book/debit card to the claimants (s) and make
an endorsement to this effect on the passbook(s) (Clause 18 )
22 Date on which the claimant(s) produced the passbook of their 25.01.2018
savings bank account near the place of their residence alongwith
the endorsement, PAN Card and Adhaar Card? (Clause 18 )
23 Permanent Residential Address of the Claimant(s) (Clause 27 ) Flat No. 319, Kautalya
Apartments, Pocket2,
Sector14, Dwarka, New
Delhi.
24. Details of savings bank account(s) of the claimant(s) and the Saving Bank Account No.
address of the bank with IFSC Code( Clause 27) 520101242958938 at
Corporation Bank,
Adilbagh, Palam Dabri
Main Road, Delhi (IFSC
Code : CORP0000452 )
25 Whether the claimant(s) savings bank account(s) is near his place Yes
of residence ? (Clause 27)
26 Whether the claimant(s) were examined at the time of passing of Yes
the award to ascertain his/their financial condition? ( Clause 27)
MACP No. : 269/16 Ruchira Mishra Vs. Ranjan Kumar 3/20
4
JUDGMENT
The present case/DAR has been filed qua the injuries caused to petitioner/injuredRuchira Mishra in a road traffic accident.
2. Brief facts as made out from the DAR are that on 15.06.2014, complainant Deepak Kumar came to the PS: Dwarka North and got recorded his statement, wherein he stated that on 09.06.2014, his wife Ruchira Mishra was coming on foot from metro station, Sector13 and after crossing the Metro View Apartment when she was crossing the road near Kautaliya Apartment, one motorcycle bearing no. DL 10SB9406 being driven by R1 Ranjan Kumar at a very high speed in rash and negligent manner hit her and as a result of impact, his wife fell down on the road and received multiple injuries. On the basis of the above said statement of the complainant, the present case was registered vide FIR No. 376/14 at PS Dwarka North and the investigation of the case was assigned to IO SI Pradeep. On conclusion of the investigation, the present DAR has been filed by the IO qua the petitioner/ injuredRuchira Mishra.
3. Written statement has been filed on behalf of R3/ United India Insurance Company Ltd., wherein it has been stated that the vehicle i.e. motorcycle bearing no. DL 10SB9406 was insured with the said insurance company vide policy No. 221605311P106081298 for the period from 20.12.2013 to 19.12.2014 in the name of Sh. Upender Singh which covers the date of accident i.e. 09.06.2014 under the terms and conditions of the insurance policy. It is further stated that on the basis of FIR, the petitioner should prove the rash and negligent driving by the driver of the alleged offending vehicle and medical records and expenses incurred on the MACP No. : 269/16 Ruchira Mishra Vs. Ranjan Kumar 4/20 5 treatment. It has also been stated therein that the court may adjudicate the matter, under the provisions of Law.
4. It is pertinent to mention here that appearance was entered on behalf of R1 Ranjan Kumar on few date (s) of hearing, however no WS has been filed on behalf of the said respondent as well as R2 Upender Singh in this case and they have also not appeared during the trial of this case.
5. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed on 04.08.2016 by the Ld. Predecessor of this court :
ISSUES :
1. Whether Ruchira Mishra sustained injuries in a motor vehicle accident dated 09.06.2014 due to rash and negligent driving of vehicle (Motorcycle) no. DL10SB9406 being driven by Ranjan Kumar, owned by Upender Singh and insured by United India Insurance Company Ltd. ...OPP
2. Whether the petitioners are entitled to claim compensation, if so, what amount and from whom ? ...OPP
3. Relief.
6. In support of her case, petitioner/ injuredRuchira Mishra has examined herself as PW1 and thereafter, PE was closed on behalf of the petitioner/ injured.
7. In its RE, R3/insurance company has not examined any witness and on 01.02.2017, Ld. Counsel for R3/ insurance company submitted that no RE was to be MACP No. : 269/16 Ruchira Mishra Vs. Ranjan Kumar 5/20 6 led and accordingly, RE was closed vide order dated 01.02.2017 passed by the Ld.Predecessor of this court.
8. I have heard arguments put forward by Ld. counsels for the petitioner and R3/ Insurance Company and have carefully gone through record of the case. I have carefully considered the evidence led by the petitioner in support of her case. I have also carefully perused written submissions as well as case law filed on behalf of the petitioner and R3/ insurance company.
It is pertinent to mention here that arguments have not been addressed on behalf of R1 Ranjan Kumar and R2 Upender Singh in this case, despite opportunity being given.
9. The issuewise findings are as under :
10. ISSUE No. 1"Whether Ruchira Mishra sustained injuries in a motor vehicle accident dated 09.06.2014 due to rash and negligent driving of vehicle (Motorcycle) no. DL10SB9406 being driven by Ranjan Kumar, owned by Upender Singh and insured by United India Insurance Company Ltd. ...OPP "
The onus to prove this issue was upon the petitioner/ injured and in order to discharge the said onus, the petitioner/ injuredRuchira Mishra has examined herself as PW1 and has filed her evidence by way of affidavit (Ex. PW1/A), wherein it has been stated that on 09.06.2014 at about 7:30 PM, she was coming on foot from Sector 13, Dwarka, New Delhi Metro Station and she was crossing the road from Metro View Apartment, Sector13, Dwarka, New Delhi side towards MACP No. : 269/16 Ruchira Mishra Vs. Ranjan Kumar 6/20 7 Kautilya Apartment, Sector14, Dwarka, New Delhi side and when she crossed the road, a motorcycle no. DL10SB9406 came at a very high speed driven by its rider most rashly negligently without following any traffic rules and regulations wrong side of road and hit her and as a result of which, she fell down on the road and received multiple fracture, head injuries and other multiple grievous injuries all over body. PW1 further deposed that after the accident, she was taken to Bensup Hospital, Dwarka, New Delhi, where she was admitted and got initial treatment of the injuries received in the accident and thereafter she was shifted to Sir Ganga Ram Hospital, New Delhi.
The important fact is that this witness i.e. PW1 Ruchira Mishra (petitioner/ injured) was cross examined on behalf of respondent, but nothing material has come on record which could assail the credibility on trustworthiness of this witness. In fact, the perusal of the record reveals that no crossexamination at all in respect of the manner in which the accident was caused has been conducted on behalf of R3/ insurance company in this case and as such, the testimony of PW1, qua the manner in which accident was caused, has remained uncontroverted.
Hence, in view of the above discussion & observations and having regard to the fact and circumstances of the present case, it is evident that petitioner/ injured Ruchira Sharma sustained injuries in motor vehicle accident due to rash and negligent driving of offending vehicle ( motorcycle ) bearing registration no. DL10SB9406 which was being driven by R1 Ranjan Kumar, owned by R2 Sh.Upender Singh and insured with R3/United India Insurance Co. Ltd. at the time of accident.
Accordingly, issue no.1 is decided in favour of the petitioner/ injured and against the respondents.
MACP No. : 269/16 Ruchira Mishra Vs. Ranjan Kumar 7/20 8
11. ISSUE No.2 "Whether the petitioner is entitled to claim compensation, if so, what amount and from whom ? ...OPP"
In the instant case, PW1 Ruchira Mishra ( petitioner/ injured) deposed that after the accident, she was taken to Bensup hospital, Dwarka, New Delhi, where she was admitted and got initial treatment of the injuries received in the accident and thereafter she was shifted to Ganga Ram hospital, New Delhi, where she was admitted from 09.06.2014 to 19.06.2014 and was operated and got treated of the injuries received in the accident and then got treatment in various hospitals and doctors due to injuries received in the accident. PW1 further deposed that she spent Rs.5 lacs on her treatment, in which Rs.3,28,083/ was paid by her Religare Health Insurance and she had paid premium of Rs.34,081/ to Religare Health Insurance for her medical policy. PW1 deposed that she would require Rs.3 lacs for her future operations and treatment. She further deposed that she spent Rs. One Lakh on conveyance and Rs. One lakh on special diet and likely to spent much more on these heads in future. PW1 deposed that she spent Rs. One Lakh on attendant and Rs.50,000/ on physiotherapy till date from the date of accident and was likely to spent much more on these heads in future and she suffered and was suffering from great pain, mental torture, mental agony, loss of amenities, loss of expectation of life, and financial loss on attendant and shocked besides financial losses. PW1 further deposed that at the time of accident, she was working in a private organization and was earning Rs.25,000/pm and due to the accident injuries, she was unable to attend her duty till date. PW1 deposed that she lost the capability of doing any work to earn livelihood for her own as well as her other family members and the accident ruined her and also lost future prospects, future pecuniary non pecuniary benefits and other MACP No. : 269/16 Ruchira Mishra Vs. Ranjan Kumar 8/20 9 special and general damages as admissible under the law and her life span has been ruined and her life has been shortened due to the accident. PW1 has also proved the relevant documents regarding treatment records, income records and education records etc. are Ex. PW1/1 to Ex. PW1/6 and DAR as Ex. PW1/7.
In the present case, from the material and evidence record, it is clear that petitioner Ruchira Mishra has sustained injuries on account of rash and negligent driving of offending vehicle ( motorcycle) bearing registration no. DL 10SB9406 which was being driven by R1 Ranjan Kumar, owned by R2 Sh.Upender Singh and insured with R3/United India Insurance Co. Ltd. at the time of accident and as such, the petitioner/injured has became entitled to claim compensation for the injuries caused to her in the abovesaid accident.
Quantum of compensation payable to the petitioner/injuredRuchira Mishra is ascertained under the following heads:
12. NATURE AND EXTENT OF INJURIES As per the medical treatment record, petitioner/injured Ruchira Mishra suffered head injury with fracture left tibia in the accident.
Further, the perusal of the record reveals that no certificate qua any disability suffered by the petitioner/injured Ruchira Mishra due to the accident, has been placed on record on behalf of the petitioner/injured .
13. MEDICINES & TREATMENT In the present case, as per record, the petitioner/injured Ruchira Mishra has undergone treatment at Bensup hospital, Dwarka, New Delhi, where she was admitted after the accident and got initial treatment of the injuries received in the accident and thereafter, she was shifted to Sir Ganga Ram hospital, New Delhi. The MACP No. : 269/16 Ruchira Mishra Vs. Ranjan Kumar 9/20 10 petitioner/injured has placed on record the medical bills, Ex. PW1/1 ( colly) pertaining to Sir Ganga Ram Hospital and these bills reveals that expenses of Rs.3,31,195/ were incurred upon the treatment of the petitioner/injured in the said hospital and out of the said amount, a sum of Rs. 3,28,083/ has been paid by Religare Health Insurance and the petitioner was required to pay only a sum of Rs.3,112/ and as such, the petitioner/injured shall be entitled to recover the said amount of Rs. 3,112/ only. PW1 ( petitioner/injured) has also filed on record the original medical bills which have not been reimbursed and the said medical bills totaling to Rs. 24,591/ were Ex. PW1/1 ( colly.). There is no reason to doubt the said bills, Ex. PW1/1 ( colly.). In these circumstances and in view of the material on record, the petitioner/injured is entitled to a sum of Rs. 3112/ + Rs. 24,591/ = Rs.27,703/ (Rupees Twenty Seven Thousand, Seven Hundred Three Only ) towards medicines and medical treatment.
14. ATTENDANT CHARGES Petitioner/injured has claimed that due to the grievous injuries suffered by her in the accident, she had to engage an attendant.
Further, it is being stated on behalf of the petitioner/injured that she had spent Rs. One lakh on the said attendant and Rs. 50,000/ on physiotherapy, however neither the said attendant has been examined nor any documentary proof regarding the payment being made to the said attendant or to the physiotherapist have been brought on record by the petitioner/injured in this case.
In the instant case, the perusal of the record reveals that petitioner/ injured Ruchira Mishra is a case of head injury with fracture left tibia and she remained hospitalized for about 10 days i.e from 09.6.2014 to19.6.2014 due to the MACP No. : 269/16 Ruchira Mishra Vs. Ranjan Kumar 10/20 11 said injuries sustained by her in the accident. Further, the medical treatment placed on record reveals that the petitioner/injured was advised eight weeks bed rest at the time of discharge from the hospital . In these circumstances, the petitioner/injured must have required the services of attendant for about six months. It is pertinent to note that the petitioner/injured would have also needed an attendant to look after her, even if the gratuitous services were rendered by the some or the other of this family members. In the case titled as "Delhi Transport Corporation and Anr. V. Lalita"
(reported as AIR 1981 Delhi 558), it has been held by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi that a victim cannot be deprived of compensation towards gratuitous services rendered by some of the family members.
In these circumstances and in view of the material on record, the petitioner/injured is entitled to an amount of Rs. 5000 X 6 = Rs. 30,000/ towards 'Attendant Charges'. In addition to this, the petitioner/injured is also awarded , a sum of Rs. 25,000/ towards the expenses incurred by her on physiotherapy . Hence, the petitioner/injured shall be entitled to a sum of Rs. 30,000/ + Rs. 25,000/= Rs.55,000/ (Rupees Fifty Five Thousand only) under this head.
15. CONVEYANCE & SPECIAL DIET In the present case, as per the medical treatment record, petitioner/ injured Ruchira Mishra suffered head injury with fracture left tibia. In these circumstances, the petitioner/injured must have visited the hospital / doctors for her treatment and would also have required special diet for certain period to recover from the injuries sustained in the accident. It is being submitted on behalf of the petitioner/injured that she has spent Rs. One Lakh on conveyance for her treatment and that she has also spent another sum of Rs. One Lakh on special diet, however MACP No. : 269/16 Ruchira Mishra Vs. Ranjan Kumar 11/20 12 no evidence, documentary or otherwise, in this regard has been brought on record on behalf of the petitioner . Further, it is pertinent to note here that no certificate qua any disability suffered by the petitioner/injured Ruchira Mishra due to the accident, has been placed on record on behalf of the petitioner/injured.
Hence, in view of the above and in view of the material on record, petitioner/ injured is awarded a sum of Rs. 50,000/ ( Rupees Fifty Thousand only) towards conveyance. Further, in view of the injuries suffered by her, the petitioner/injured must have needed special diet for a certain period to have a fast and proper recovery. In these circumstances and in view of the material on record, the petitioner/injured is also awarded Rs. 30,000/ ( Rupees Thirty Thousand Only) towards expenses for special diet.
16. LOSS OF INCOME In the present case, the petitioner/injured stated that at the time of accident, she was working in a private organization and was earning Rs.25,000/pm and due to the accident injuries, she was unable to attend her duty till date. The perusal of the record reveals that petitioner/injured has placed on record a letter ( Ex. PW1/5) from T. D. Newton & Associates, which reflects that she was entitled to a monthly fixed compensation of Rs.20,000/ p.m for her role of associate consultant in the said firm w.e.f. 16.8.2013.
In the instant case, the petitioner/injured has suffered head injury with fracture left tibia and has remained hospitalized for about 10 days and thereafter she was also advised eight weeks bed rest after her discharge from the hospital. Further, in view of the material on record, it appears that it might have taken 56 months for the petitioner to recover from the said injuries sustained by MACP No. : 269/16 Ruchira Mishra Vs. Ranjan Kumar 12/20 13 her in the accident. In these circumstances and in view of the material on record, the petitioner/injured is awarded a sum of Rs. 20,000/ x 6= Rs. 1.2 lacs ( Rupees One Lakh Twenty Thousand Only) under this head.
17. PAIN & SUFFERINGS As per the settled law, for assessing the pain & sufferings, the following factors have to be taken into account :
(a) Nature of injury
(b) Parts of body where injuries occurred
(c) Surgeries, if any
(d) Confinement in hospital
(e) Duration of the treatment.
In the instant case, in view of the material/evidence on record, there is no element of doubt that the petitioner/injured has suffered grievous injuries in the accident and has remained hospitalized for about 10 days due to the said injuries sustained by her and thereafter she was also advised eight weeks bed rest after her discharge from the hospital. In these circumstances and in view of the law laid down in the case titled as "Rekha Jain Vs. National Insurance Co. Ltd." (arising out of SLP (C) Nos. 564951 of 2012), the petitioner/injured is entitled to compensation on account of pain & suffering due to the accident. The pain and sufferings of petitioner/injured can not be adequately compensated in terms of money however, in view of the facts & circumstances of the present case and in view of the material on record, a sum of Rs. 2.5 lacs ( Rupees Two Lacs, Fifty Thousand Only) is awarded to the petitioner towards the head " pain & sufferings".
18. LOSS OF ENJOYMENT OF LIFE AND AMENITIES The petitioner/injured has claimed that she has suffered the loss of MACP No. : 269/16 Ruchira Mishra Vs. Ranjan Kumar 13/20 14 enjoyment of life and other amenities on account of the accident. The petitioner/injured was about 36 years of age at the time of accident and has suffered head injury with fracture left tibia and was hospitalized for about 10 days and thereafter she was also advised eight weeks bed rest after her discharge from the hospital due to the said injuries sustained in the accident. In these circumstances and in view of the law laid down vide judgment of Rekha Jain (Supra), the petitioner/injured shall be entitled to a sum of Rs. 1.5 lacs (Rupees One Lakh, Fifty Thousand only) as compensation towards loss of enjoyment of life and amenities. In addition to this, the petitioner/injured shall also be entitled to a sum of Rs.50,000/ ( Rupees Fifty Thousand only) as compensation for mental and physical shock suffered by her due to the accident in this case.
19. The breakup of compensation that has been awarded to the petitioner/ is tabulated as below : S.No. HEADS AMOUNT (in Rupees) 1 Medicines & Treatment Rs. 27,703/ 2 Attendant Charges + Physiotherapy Rs. 55,000/ 3 Conveyance Rs. 50,000/
4. Special Diet Rs. 30,000/ 5 Loss of Income Rs. 1.2 lacs 6 Pain & Sufferings Rs. 2.5 lacs 7 Loss of Enjoyment of Life and Amenities. Rs. 1.5 lacs 8 Compensation for mental and physical shock Rs. 50,000/ Total Rs. 7,32,703/ MACP No. : 269/16 Ruchira Mishra Vs. Ranjan Kumar 14/20 15
20. 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 petitioner is awarded interest @ 9% per annum on the abovesaid compensation/ award amount i.e Rs.7,32,703/ from the date of filing of petition i.e. 28.5.2015 till realization.
21. LIABILITY The offending vehicle was being driven by respondent No. 1Ranjan Kumar , owned by respondent no. 2Upender Singh and was insured with respondent no. 3/United India Insurance Co. Ltd at the time of accident and as such, respondent no. 3/ United India Insurance Co. Ltd., being the 'principal tort feasor', is liable to pay the awarded amount.
Hence, in view of the above, Issue No. 2 is decided accordingly.
22. RELIEF Thus in view of the above discussions and observations and having regard to the fact and circumstances of the present case, an award for a sum of Rs.7,32,703/ ( Rupees Seven Lacs, Thirty Two Thousand, Seven Hundred Three only) alongwith interest @ 9% p.a from the date of filing of the petition i.e 28.5.2015 till realization is passed in favour of the petitioner/injured Ruchira Mishra. The said compensation amount shall be payable by the respondent no.3/ United India Insurance Co. Ltd.
MACP No. : 269/16 Ruchira Mishra Vs. Ranjan Kumar 15/20 16
23. FORMIVB SUMMARY OF THE COMPUTATION OF AWARD AMOUNT IN INJURY CASES TO BE INCORPORATED IN THE AWARD
i) Date of accident : 09.6.2014
ii). Name of the injured : Ms. Ruchira Mishra
iii). Age of the injured : 36 years ( at the time of accident)
iv). Occupation of the injured : Associate Analyst (at the time of accident)
v). Income of the injured : Rs. 20,000/ p.m
vi). Nature of injury : Grievous
vii). Medical treatment taken : Bensup hospital, Dwarka, New Delhi by the injured and Sir Ganga Ram , New Delhi
viii). Period of hospitalization : About 10 days
ix). Whether any permanent : No disability?If yes, give details
10. Computation of Compensation S. No. Heads Awarded by the Tribunal
11. Pecuniary Loss:
(i) Expenditure on treatment Rs. 27,703/
(ii) Expenditure on conveyance Rs. 50,000/
(iii) Expenditure on special diet Rs. 30,000/
(iv) Cost of nursing/attendant Rs. 55,000/
(v) Loss of earning capacity
(vi) Loss of income Rs. 1.2 lacs
(vii) Any other loss which may require any
special treatment or aid to the injured for
the rest of his life
12. Non Pecuniary Loss:
(i) Compensation for mental and physical Rs. 50,000/
MACP No. : 269/16 Ruchira Mishra Vs. Ranjan Kumar 16/20
17
shock
(ii) Pain and suffering Rs. 2.5 lacs
(iii) Loss of amenities of life Rs. 1.5 lacs
(iv) Disfiguration
(v) Loss of marriage prospects
(vi) Loss of earning, inconvenience, hardships,
disappointment, frustration, mental stress
dejectment and unhappiness in future life
etc.,
13. Disability resulting in loss of earning capacity
(i) Percentage of disability assessed and nature Nil of disability as permanent or temporary
(ii) Loss of amenities or loss of expectation of life span on account of disability
(iii) Percentage of loss of earning capacity in relation to disability
(iv) Loss of future income(Income x % Earning Capacity x Multiplier)
14. Total Compensation Rs. 7,32,703/
15. INTEREST AWARDED
16. Interest amount up to the date of award @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of petition i.e. 28.5.2015 till realization.
17. Total amount including interest Rs. 7,32,703/ + interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the petition i.e. 28.5.2015 till realization.
18. Award amount released Rs. 1,32,703/
19. Award amount kept in FDRs Rs. 6 lacs
20. Mode of disbursement of the award By credit in the SB Account of amount to the claimant(s) (Clause29) the petitioner/injured. 21 Next Date for compliance of the award. 28.5.2018 ( Clause 31)
24. In the instant case, the award amount shall be deposited by the MACP No. : 269/16 Ruchira Mishra Vs. Ranjan Kumar 17/20 18 respondent no.3/United India Insurance Co. Ltd. with State Bank of India, Dwarka Courts Complex, New Delhi within 30 days from the date of receipt of the judgment/award either directly or through Banker's Cheque / DD, under intimation with proof of notice to the claimant/ petitioner and his counsel, to the Nazir of this court.
Further, the statement of petitioner/injured Ms. Ruchira Mishra regarding her financial status, needs and liabilities have also been recorded in this case . In view of the said statement of the petitioner/injured and having regard to facts and circumstances of the present case , the award amount be distributed as follows: S.No. Name Status Amount of Award Release Amount Amount /Period of FDR
1. Ms Ruchira Injured Rs. 7,32,703/ Rs. 1,32,703/ Rs. 6 lacs be kept in 60 Mishra FDRs of Rs. 10,000/ each for the period from one month to 60 months in the name of petitioner/injured with cumulative interest.
25. Petitioner/injured Ms. Ruchira Mishra has produced the passbook of his SB Account No. 520101242958938 at Corporation Bank, Adilbagh, Palam Dabri Main Road, Delhi (IFSC Code : CORP0000452), wherein it has been endorsed that " No ATM/Cheque Book to be issued in this A/c without court order ".
It is being requested on behalf of the injured that the abovesaid cash amount/FDRs may be transferred to her aforesaid SB Account at Corporation Bank, Adilbagh, Palam Dabri Main Road, Delhi .
Accordingly, the Manager, State Bank of India,Dwarka Courts Complex, New Delhi is directed to transfer the abovesaid cash amount and FDRs of MACP No. : 269/16 Ruchira Mishra Vs. Ranjan Kumar 18/20 19 Rs.10,000/ each to the abovesaid SB Account No. 520101242958938 of injured Ruchira Mishra at Corporation Bank, Adilbagh, Palam Dabri Main Road, Delhi, as prayed.
Corporation Bank, Adilbagh, Palam Dabri Main Road, Delhi is directed to release the abovesaid cash amount of Rs. 1,32,703/ to injured Ms. Ruchira Mishra 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 , Corporation Bank, Adilbagh, Palam Dabri Main Road, Delhi is directed not to permit loan or premature encashment qua the abovesaid FDRs to the injured Ms.Ruchira Mishra, 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 injured Ms.Ruchira Mishra .
The said Corporation Bank, Adilbagh, Palam Dabri Main Road, 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 injured Ms. Ruchira Mishra .
Corporation Bank, Adilbagh, Palam Dabri Main Road, Delhi shall permit account holder Ms. Ruchira Mishra to withdraw money from her abovesaid saving bank account by means of a withdrawal form .
MACP No. : 269/16 Ruchira Mishra Vs. Ranjan Kumar 19/20 20 The insurance company shall inform the injured as well as her counsel through registered post that the cheque of the award amount is being deposited so as to facilitate the injured to know about the deposit in the account.
Copy of this award be sent to the concerned Manager, SBI, Dwarka Courts, New Delhi and Manager, Corporation Bank, Adilbagh, Palam Dabri Main Road, Delhi for information /compliance.
Copy of this award be also given ''Dasti' to the injured /her counsel and Ld. Counsel for the respondent/insurance company, as prayed.
Ahlmad is directed to prepare a separate misc. file and put up the same for filing of the compliance report on 28.5.2018.
File be consigned to the record room.
(Announced in the open (Paramjit Singh)
Court on 25.4.2018) PO, MACT (SouthWest District)
Dwarka Courts, New Delhi
25.4.2018
Digitally
signed by
PARAMJIT
PARAMJIT SINGH
SINGH Date:
2018.04.25
15:42:53
+0530
MACP No. : 269/16 Ruchira Mishra Vs. Ranjan Kumar 20/20