Delhi District Court
Khushi Ram vs . Shamsuddin & Ors. on 28 March, 2018
IN THE COURT OF SHRI RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN:
PRESIDING OFFICER: MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL: SOUTH
EAST DISTRICT/ SAKET COURTS: NEW DELHI
MACT No. 963/17
FIR No. 236/17
PS Hazrat Nizamuddin
Khushi Ram Vs. Shamsuddin & Ors.
st
1
Injury Case
Sh. Khushi Ram s/o late Sh. Ram Singh
R/o H.No. WZ438A, Raj Nagar, Part2,
Gali No.2, Palam Colony, New Delhi.
And
Vijay Prasad Vs. Shamsuddin & Ors.
2 nd Injury Case
Sh. Vijay Prasad s/o Sh. Ramesh Chander,
R/o. H.No. 229B, Mayur Vihar, Phase III,
New Delhi.
........................... Petitioners/Claimants
Versus
1. Sh. Shamsuddin S/o late Suleman (Driver)
R/o H. No. 1203, PhaseII, Gautam Puri,
Badar Pur, New Delhi.
2. M/s Indraprastha Logistics Ltd. (Owner)
M92, Greater KailashII, New Delhi
[Through Sh. Sushil Kumar, Operation Manager,
Indraprastha Logistics Ltd., Cluster No. 2,
Kushak Nallah Depot (Barapulla)]
MACT No. 963/17 Khushi Ram Vs. Shamshuddin & Ors.
Vijay Prasad Vs. Shamshuddin & Ors. Page 1/19
3. United India Insurance Co. Ltd. (Insurer)
8th Floor, Kanchanjunga Building,
18 Barakhamba Road, New Delhi
.....................Respondents
Initial date of Institution : 15.11.2017
Date of reserving the judgment : 21.03.2018
Date of pronouncement : 26.03.2018
JUDGMENT: Present claim proceedings initiated on the basis of Detailed Accidental Report (DAR) filed by the police on 15.11.2017 regarding injuries suffered by injured persons namely Khushi Ram and Vijay Prasad in a road accident.
1. Brief facts of the case are that on 04.09.2017 at about 02.30 PM, when both the injured persons were standing at Lala Lajpat Rai Bus Stop, near Shamshan Ghat, Hazrat Nizamuddin, New Delhi and were waiting for bus, offending vehicle bearing No. DL1PC5373 (Orange Cluster Bus), being driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner and with high speed, came from the side of Zoological Park and hit both the petitioners. Due to forceful impact, both petitioners sustained injuries.
2. FIR number 236/17 under Section 279/337 IPC was got registered at PS H. N. Din. Police conducted investigation. On completion of investigation, respondent No. 1 driver was found accused of rash and negligent driving and he was chargesheeted for the commission of offence under Section 279/337 of Indian Penal Code.
3. During proceedings, despite opportunities, respondents No. 1 and 2 failed to file any reply/written statement.
MACT No. 963/17 Khushi Ram Vs. Shamshuddin & Ors.
Vijay Prasad Vs. Shamshuddin & Ors. Page 2/194. During proceedings, respondent No. 3 filed its reply/ written statement taking preliminary objection that FIR was registered after 14 days of accident which create doubt on the involvement of respondent No. 1 and offending vehicle in the accident. However, it is admitted that vehicle bearing registration No. DL 1PC5373 was insured with the answering respondent vide policy No. 0406003116P113088801 valid from 03.01.2017 to 02.01.2018 in the name of respondent No. 2.
5. From the pleadings, following issues were framed on 30.01.2018: (1) Whether the injured received injuries in the accident which took place on 04.09.2017 at about 02.30 PM involving offending vehicle bearing No. DL 1PC 5371 due to rash and negligent driving of respondent no. 1/driver, owned by respondent no. 2/owner and insured by respondent no. 3(insurance company)? OPP (2) To what amount of compensation the petitioner is entitled to claim and from whom? OPP (3) Relief.
6. Perusal of issue No. 1 shows that registration number of offending vehicle has been wrongly mentioned as 'DL1PC5371' whereas correct registration number is 'DL1PC5373'. Perusal of DAR also shows that in many places, registration number of offending vehicle has been wrongly mentioned as 'DL 1PC5371' instead of 'DL1PC5373'. Thus, issue No. 1 is required to be re framed as under: (1) Whether the injured persons suffered injuries in a road vehicular accident that took place on 04.09.2017 involving offending vehicle bearing registration No. DL1PC5373 which was driven in a rash and negligent MACT No. 963/17 Khushi Ram Vs. Shamshuddin & Ors.
Vijay Prasad Vs. Shamshuddin & Ors. Page 3/19manner by respondent No. 1, owned by respondent No. 2 and insured by respondent No. 3? OPP
7. During evidence, injured Khushi Ram examined himself as PW1 and tendered his evidence by way of affidavit Ex. PW1/A. He has relied upon copy of his Office Identity Card as Ex. PW1/1; copy of his Pay Roll, Attendance Sheet and Bank Statement as Ex. PW1/2 (collectively); copy of MLC as Ex. PW1/3; original medical papers as Ex. PW1/4 (collectively); medical bills as Ex. PW1/5 (collectively); DAR as Ex. PW1/6; copy of PAN Card as Ex. PW1/7 and copy of his Aadhar Card as Ex. PW1/8. He has deposed regarding the manner of accident.
8. Injured Vijay Prasad did not appear despite being bound down through pabandinama. Learned counsel for injured Vijay Prasad submitted that injured Vijay Prasad do not have any medical bills and Tribunal may decide the claim of injured Vijay Prasad on the basis of documents already filed alongwith the DAR.
9. No evidence to the contrary has been led by any of the respondents.
10. After hearing arguments and considering the material on record, my issue wise findings are as follows: Issue No. 1 (Negligence):
11. PW1 Khushi Ram in his affidavit of evidence (Ex. PW1/A) has categorically stated that he got injuries due to the rash and negligent driving of respondent No. 1. Nothing came in his crossexamination to disbelieve his version. The only contradiction brought on record by the learned counsel for Insurance Company was regarding the registration number of offending vehicle, but MACT No. 963/17 Khushi Ram Vs. Shamshuddin & Ors.
Vijay Prasad Vs. Shamshuddin & Ors. Page 4/19PW1 duly clarified during his crossexamination that accident took place with vehicle bearing registration No. DL1PC5373 a cluster bus. He further deposed that he had given the complaint Ex. PW1/PX to the SHO PS Nizamuddin where the number of offending vehicle is mentioned as DL1PC 5371 and volunteered to say that he subsequently corrected the number as DL 1PC5373 which was got wrongly mentioned as DL1PC5371 and produced letter Mark X while submitting that he had given Mark X regarding correction of registration number to the SHO on 20.10.2017. Even otherwise, perusal of DAR shows that offending vehicle bearing registration DL1PC5373 was seized by the police and details of said vehicle were verified by the IO from concerned transport department.
12. Learned counsel for Insurance Company has also argued that there is a delay of about 14 days in registration of FIR. Though FIR was registered on 18.10.2017, but MLC and medical record of both injured persons show that they did suffer injuries in road accident which took place on 04.09.2017. Claim of both the injured persons cannot be dismissed solely on the basis of delay in registration of FIR when there is clear evidence on record that they suffered injuries in the accident. Hence, delay in registration of FIR is only a technical glitch and both the injured persons should be granted compensation.
13. Police during investigation also found respondent No. 1 accused of rash and negligent driving, hence, chargesheeted him for commission of offence under Section 279/337 of Indian Penal Code. To determine the negligence of the driver of the offending vehicle, I am being guided by the judgment of Hon'ble High Court (MP) in case titled as "Basant Kaur & Ors Vs. Chattar Pal Singh and Ors" [2003 ACJ 369 MP (DB)], wherein it has been held that registration of a criminal case against the driver of the offending vehicle is enough to MACT No. 963/17 Khushi Ram Vs. Shamshuddin & Ors.
Vijay Prasad Vs. Shamshuddin & Ors. Page 5/19record the finding that the driver of offending vehicle is responsible for causing the accident. Further, it has been held in catena of cases that the proceedings under the Motor Vehicles Act are not akin to the proceedings as in civil suit and hence strict rules of evidence are not required to be followed in this regard. I am also being guided by the judgment of Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in "National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Pushpa Rana" (2009 ACJ 287), wherein it was held that in case the petitioner files the certified copy of the criminal record or the criminal record showing the completion of the investigation by the police or the issuance of charge sheet under Section 279/304 A IPC or the certified copy of the FIR or in addition the recovery memo or the mechanical inspection report of the offending vehicle, these documents are sufficient proof to reach to the conclusion that the driver was negligent. It is also settled law that the term rashness and negligence has to be constructed lightly while making a decision on a petition for claim for the same as compared to the word rashness and negligence as finds mention in the Indian Penal Code. This is because the chapter in the Motor Vehicle Act dealing with compensation is a benevolent legislation and not a penal one.
14. In view of the above discussion, injured persons are able to prove that they suffered injuries due to rash and negligent driving of offending vehicle by the respondent No.1. Accordingly the issue No. 1 is decided in favour of the petitioner and against the respondents.
Issue No 2. (Compensation) I shall dispose off issue No. 2 for both the injured persons separately as under: Compensation payable to petitioner Khushi Ram
15. Medical Expenses : PW1 Khushi Ram in his affidavit of evidence stated that after accident he was removed to the AIIMS Trauma Center. As per MLC Ex.
MACT No. 963/17 Khushi Ram Vs. Shamshuddin & Ors.
Vijay Prasad Vs. Shamshuddin & Ors. Page 6/19PW1/3 issued from AIIMS Trauma Center, petitioner suffered simple injuries in the accident. As per Discharge Note Ex. PW1/4 issued from AIIMS Trauma Center, petitioner suffered soft tissue injury and he was discharged on the same day of the accident. He was having pain, swelling and wound in left foot. During his crossexamination, PW1 has deposed that he did not suffer any fracture in the accident but he was given 22 stitches on his left feet in Trauma Centre. He also placed on record photograph of his feet as Mark B which was taken by him in his mobile at the time of dressing of his wound. Medical record of petitioner also shows that he took treatment from Divya Prastha Multi Speciality Hospital, Dwarka, New Delhi. Petitioner has also filed medical bills in the sum of Rs.14,584/. Though petitioner has suffered simple injuries, but stitches were given in his left leg. Keeping in view the nature of injuries suffered by the petitioner, he is awarded a sum of Rs.14,600/ towards medical expenses.
16. Compensation for pain and suffering: Though petitioner is found to have suffered soft tissue injury, but he also suffered 22 stitches in his left leg in the accident. Petitioner has suffered not only the physical injuries but also suffered mental trauma. Hence, keeping in view nature of injuries, duration of treatment, trauma of accident, a sum of Rs.40,000/ is granted towards pain and suffering.
17. Loss of income: PW1 Khushi Ram has deposed in his affidavit of evidence that he was doing the work of Security Guard with Sanjay Kumar Security Agency and was earning Rs.23,995/ per month. In his crossexamination, PW1 Khushi Ram has volunteered to say that due to injuries suffered by him in his leg, he was unable to perform his duties as Security Guard and he had to take leaves for 40 days. Petitioner has filed his office ID, Attendance Sheet and MACT No. 963/17 Khushi Ram Vs. Shamshuddin & Ors.
Vijay Prasad Vs. Shamshuddin & Ors. Page 7/19copy of Bank Passbook. Attendance record of petitioner shows that he remained absent from his duty for 40 days (from 05.09.2017 to 12.10.2017). As per salary record, his monthly income was Rs.23,995/ which used to vary on the basis of his attendance. Per day income of petitioner comes out to Rs.799.8 (Rs.23,995/ divided by 30). Petitioner suffered loss of income for 40 days. Hence, petitioner is awarded a sum of (Rs.799.8 X 40) Rs.31,992/ towards loss of income.
18. Compensation for Special Diet, Attendant and Conveyance: PW1 Khushi Ram has not filed any documentary evidence to show money spent towards special diet, attendant and conveyance. However, he suffered 22 stitches in his left leg. He also visited Divya Prastha Multi Speciality Hospital, Dwarka, New Delhi to attend OPD. Keeping in view the nature of injuries and duration of treatment, a sum of Rs.30,000/ is granted to petitioner under this head.
19. Thus, the total compensation to which petitioner is entitled comes as under: S.No Details Amount 1 Compensation for medical expenses Rs.14,600/ Compensation for special diet, attendant and Rs.30,000/ 2 conveyance 3 Compensation for pain and sufferings Rs.40,000/ 4 Compensation for loss of income Rs.31,992/ Total Rs.1,16,592/ Petitioner Khushi Ram is hereby awarded a compensation of Rs.1,16,592/ (One Lac Sixteen Thousand Five Hundred and Ninety Two Only).
Compensation payable to petitioner Vijay Prasad
20. Medical Expenses : After the accident, petitioner Vijay Prasad was removed to MACT No. 963/17 Khushi Ram Vs. Shamshuddin & Ors.
Vijay Prasad Vs. Shamshuddin & Ors. Page 8/19the AIIMS Trauma Center. As per MLC issued from AIIMS Trauma Center, petitioner suffered simple injuries in the accident. As per Discharge Note issued from AIIMS Trauma Center, petitioner suffered soft tissue injury and he was discharged on the same day of the accident. No medical bills of petitioner have been filed. No other medical record of petitioner is on record. In the absence of any medical bill, petitioner cannot be awarded any sum under this head.
21. Compensation for pain and suffering: Petitioner has suffered only simple injuries in the accident. He has not appeared before this Tribunal. He neither claimed nor filed even a single document to show any loss. Hence, he cannot be awarded any sum under this head.
22. Loss of income: Petitioner has suffered only simple injuries in the accident.
He has not appeared before this Tribunal. He neither claimed nor filed even a single document to show any loss. Hence, he cannot be awarded any sum under this head.
23. Compensation for Special Diet, Attendant and Conveyance: Petitioner has suffered only simple injuries in the accident. He has not appeared before this Tribunal. He neither claimed nor filed even a single document to show any loss. Hence, he cannot be awarded any sum under this head.
24. As per above discussion, petitioner Vijay Prasad is not awarded any sum as compensation.
Relief:
MACT No. 963/17 Khushi Ram Vs. Shamshuddin & Ors.Vijay Prasad Vs. Shamshuddin & Ors. Page 9/19
(i) Relief for injured Khushi Ram: Petitioner Khushi Ram is hereby awarded a sum of Rs.1,16,592/ (One Lac Sixteen Thousand Five Hundred and Ninety Two Only) alongwith interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the DAR till the date of realization in favour of petitioner against the respondent.
(ii) Relief for injured Vijay Prasad: Petitioner Vijay Prasad is not awarded any sum as compensation and his claim stands dismissed.
25. The driver R1 is the principal tort feasor and R2 being the owner vicariously liable for the acts of R1 and R3 being insurance company liable to indemnify the R2 owner.
26. In view of the above discussion, R3/insurance company is directed to deposit the award amount in the court within a period of 30 days from today alongwith the interest @ 9% per annum, failing which interest @ 12% per annum shall be charged for the period of delay.
27. Deposition of awarded amount with STATE BANK OF INDIA, Saket Court Branch, New Delhi.
28. i) Claimant/petitioner Khushi Ram shall furnish all the relevant documents for opening of the Saving Bank Accounts to Branch Manager, State Bank of India, Saket Courts Complex Branch, New Delhi. Withdrawal from the aforesaid account shall be permitted to claimant/ petitioner after due verification and the Bank shall issue photo identity Card to claimant/petitioner to facilitate identity. No cheque book be issued to claimant/petitioner without the permission of this Court. On the request of claimant/petitioner, the Bank shall transfer the Savings Account to any other branch of State Bank of India, according to his MACT No. 963/17 Khushi Ram Vs. Shamshuddin & Ors.
Vijay Prasad Vs. Shamshuddin & Ors. Page 10/19convenience.
(ii) In pursuance to the directions passed in Modified Motor Accident Claims Tribunal Agreed Procedure as approved by Hon'ble High Court of Delhi, petitioner/ claimant/ Khushi Ram is directed to open savings bank account in a nationalized bank near the place of his residence and the concerned bank is directed to not issue any cheque book and/or debit card to the claimant(s) and if the same have already been issued, the bank is directed to cancel the same and make an endorsement on the passbook of the claimant(s) to the effect that no cheque book and/ or debit card shall be issued without permission of the Court. The claimant(s) is directed to produce the copy of the order before the concerned bank whereupon the bank is directed to make the endorsement on the passbook. The claimant(s) is directed to produce the passbook with the necessary endorsement as well as Aadhar Card and PAN Card before this Tribunal on the next date of hearing.
Directions for the respondent No. 3. Respondent No. 3 is directed to file the compliance report of their having deposited the awarded amount with the State Bank of India, Saket Court Branch in this Tribunal within a period of 30 days from today.
29. Respondent No. 3 will intimate to the claimant/ petitioner about it having deposited the cheque in favour of petitioners in terms of the award, at the address of the petitioners mentioned at the title of the award, so as to facilitate them to withdraw the same.
30. Copy of this Award be given to the parties free of cost and a copy be also sent to SBI, Saket Court Complex Branch for record and compliance.
FORM - IV B MACT No. 963/17 Khushi Ram Vs. Shamshuddin & Ors.
Vijay Prasad Vs. Shamshuddin & Ors. Page 11/19SUMMARY OF COMPUTATION OF AWARD AMOUNT IN INJURY CASES TO BE INCORPORATED IN THE AWARD
1. Date of accident: 04.09.2017
2. Name of the injured: Khushi Ram
3. Age of the injured: 49 years
4. Occupation of the injured: Security Guard
5. Income of the injured: Rs.23,995/ per month
6. Nature of injury: Simple injury, but he suffered 22 stitches
7. Medical treatment taken by the injured: Petitioner received initial treatment from Trauma Centre, AIIMS, New Delhi. Thereafter, he received treatment from Divya Prastha Multi Speciality Hospital, Dwarka, New Delhi.
8. Period of hospitalization: NIL
9. Whether any permanent disability? If yes, give details: Petitioner has not suffered any permanent disability.
10. Computation of Compensation S. No. Heads Awarded by the Tribunal
11. Pecuniary Loss:
(i) Expenditure on treatment Rs.14,600/
(ii) Expenditure on conveyance
(iii) Expenditure on special diet Rs.30,000/
(iv) Cost of nursing/attendant
(v) Loss of earning capacity NIL
(vi) Loss of income Rs.31,992/
(vii) Any other loss which may require any Already included in 12 special treatment or aid to the injured for (ii) the rest of his life
12. NonPecuniary Loss:
MACT No. 963/17 Khushi Ram Vs. Shamshuddin & Ors.Vijay Prasad Vs. Shamshuddin & Ors. Page 12/19
(i) Compensation for mental and physical Already included in 12 shock (ii)
(ii) Pain and suffering Rs.40,000/
(iii) Loss of amenities of life Already included in 12
(ii)
(iv) Disfiguration NIL
(v) Loss of marriage prospects NIL
(vi) Loss of earning, inconvenience, hardships, Already included in 12 disappointment, frustration, mental stress, (ii) dejectment and unhappiness in future life etc.
13. Disability resulting in loss of earning capacity: Injured has not suffered any disability in the present case.
(i) Percentage of disability assessed and nature Not applicable since of disability as permanent or temporary petitioner has not suffered any disability in in the present road accident
(ii) Loss of amenities or loss of expectation of Not applicable since life span on account of disability petitioner has not suffered any disability in in the present road accident
(iii) Percentage of loss of earning capacity in Not applicable since relation to disability petitioner has not suffered any disability in in the present road accident
(iv) Loss of future income(Income x % Not applicable since Earning Capacity x Multiplier) petitioner has not suffered any disability in in the present road accident
14. TOTAL COMPENSATION Rs.1,16,592/
15. INTEREST AWARDED @9% per annum
16. Interest amount up to the date of award Rs.3,877/
17. Total amount including interest Rs.1,20,469/ MACT No. 963/17 Khushi Ram Vs. Shamshuddin & Ors.
Vijay Prasad Vs. Shamshuddin & Ors. Page 13/1918. Award amount released Entire award amount is released.
19. Award amount kept in FDRs Not applicable.
20. Mode of disbursement of the award amount Bank Manager, SBI, to the claimant(s). (Clause 29) Saket Court Complex, New Delhi is directed to open bank account in the name of petitioner.
21. Next date for compliance of the award. 01.05.2018 (Clause 31) FORM - IV B SUMMARY OF COMPUTATION OF AWARD AMOUNT IN INJURY CASES TO BE INCORPORATED IN THE AWARD
1. Date of accident: 04.09.2017
2. Name of the injured: Vijay Prasad
3. Age of the injured: 32 years
4. Occupation of the injured: Not proved by the petitioner
5. Income of the injured: Not proved by the petitioner
6. Nature of injury: Simple
7. Medical treatment taken by the injured: Petitioner suffered simple injuries in the accident.
8. Period of hospitalization: NIL
9. Whether any permanent disability? If yes, give details: Petitioner has not suffered any permanent disability.
10. Computation of Compensation S. No. Heads Awarded by the Tribunal
11. Pecuniary Loss:
MACT No. 963/17 Khushi Ram Vs. Shamshuddin & Ors.Vijay Prasad Vs. Shamshuddin & Ors. Page 14/19
(i) Expenditure on treatment NIL (ii) Expenditure on conveyance NIL (iii) Expenditure on special diet NIL (iv) Cost of nursing/attendant NIL (v) Loss of earning capacity NIL (vi) Loss of income NIL (vii) Any other loss which may require any NIL
special treatment or aid to the injured for the rest of his life
12. NonPecuniary Loss:
(i) Compensation for mental and physical NIL shock
(ii) Pain and suffering NIL
(iii) Loss of amenities of life NIL
(iv) Disfiguration NIL
(v) Loss of marriage prospects NIL
(vi) Loss of earning, inconvenience, hardships, NIL disappointment, frustration, mental stress, dejectment and unhappiness in future life etc.
13. Disability resulting in loss of earning capacity: Injured has not suffered any disability in the present case.
(i) Percentage of disability assessed and nature Not applicable since of disability as permanent or temporary petitioner has not suffered any disability in in the present road accident
(ii) Loss of amenities or loss of expectation of Not applicable since life span on account of disability petitioner has not suffered any disability in in the present road accident
(iii) Percentage of loss of earning capacity in Not applicable since relation to disability petitioner has not suffered any disability in in the present road MACT No. 963/17 Khushi Ram Vs. Shamshuddin & Ors.
Vijay Prasad Vs. Shamshuddin & Ors. Page 15/19accident
(iv) Loss of future income(Income x % Not applicable since Earning Capacity x Multiplier) petitioner has not suffered any disability in in the present road accident
14. TOTAL COMPENSATION NIL
15. INTEREST AWARDED NIL
16. Interest amount up to the date of award NIL
17. Total amount including interest NIL
18. Award amount released NIL
19. Award amount kept in FDRs NIL
20. Mode of disbursement of the award amount NIL to the claimant(s). (Clause 29)
21. Next date for compliance of the award. 01.05.2018 (Clause 31) FORMV COMPLIANCE OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE MODIFIED CLAIMS TRIBUNAL AGREED PROCEDURE TO BE MENTIONED IN THE AWARD 1 Date of the accident. 04.09.2017 2 Date of intimation of the accident 22.10.2017 (FIR was by the Investigating Officer to the registered on 18.10.2017) Claims Tribunal.
3 Date of intimation of the accident Not provided by the by the Investigating Officer to the Insurance Company Insurance Company.
4 Date of filing of Report under Not known.
Section 173 Cr.P.C. before the Metropolitan Magistrate.
5 Date of filing of Detailed Accident 15.11.2017 Information Report (DAR) by the Investigating Officer before MACT No. 963/17 Khushi Ram Vs. Shamshuddin & Ors.
Vijay Prasad Vs. Shamshuddin & Ors. Page 16/19Claims Tribunal.
6 Date of service of DAR on the 15.11.2017 Insurance Company.
7 Date of service of DAR on the 15.11.2017 claimant(s).
8 Whether DAR was complete in all Yes respects?
9 If not, state deficiencies in the Not applicable DAR?
10 Whether the police has verified the Yes documents filed with DAR?
11 Whether there was any delay or Not applicable deficiency on the part of the Investigating Officer? If so, whether any action/ direction warranted?
12 Date of appointment of the Not provided by the Designated Officer by the Insurance Company. Insurance Company.
13 Name, address and contact Not provided by the number of the Designated Officer Insurance Company. of the Insurance Company.
14 Whether the Designated Officer of Yes the Insurance Company submitted his report within 30 days of the DAR?
15 Whether the Insurance Company Insurance Company denied admitted the liability? If so, its liability to pay whether the Designated Officer of compensation the Insurance Company fairly computed the compensation in accordance with law.
16 Whether there was any delay or Not applicable deficiency on the part of the Designated Officer of the MACT No. 963/17 Khushi Ram Vs. Shamshuddin & Ors.
Vijay Prasad Vs. Shamshuddin & Ors. Page 17/19Insurance Company? If so, whether any action/direction warranted?
17 Date of response of the claimant(s) No legal offer has been filed to the offer of the Insurance Company.
18 Date of the award. 28.03.2018 19 Whether the award was passed No with the consent of the parties?
20. Whether the claimant(s) were Yes directed to open savings bank account(s) near their place of residence?
21. Date of order by which claimant(s) 28.03.2018 were directed to open savings bank account(s) near his place of residence and produce PAN Card and Aadhar Card and the direction to the bank not issue any cheque book/ debit card to the claimant(s) and make and endorsement to this effect on the passbook(s)
22. Date of which the claimant(s) Petitioner Khushi Ram shall produced the passbook of their produce passbook on the savings bank account near the next date of hearing i.e. place of their residence alongwith 01.05.2018 the endorsement, PAN Card and Aadhar Card?
23. Permanent Residential Address of As mentioned in array of the claimant(s) parties
24. Details of savings bank account(s) To be given by petitioner of the claimant(s) and the address Khushi Ram on next date of the bank with IFSC Code. i.e. 01.05.2018
25. Whether the claimant(s) savings Petitioner Khushi Ram is bank account(s) is near his place of directed to open bank MACT No. 963/17 Khushi Ram Vs. Shamshuddin & Ors.
Vijay Prasad Vs. Shamshuddin & Ors. Page 18/19 residence? account near his place of
residence
26. Whether the claimant(s) examined No, but his financial at the time of passing of the award condition was inquired to ascertain his/their financial condition?
Announced in open Court Dated: 26.03.2018 (Raj Kumar Chauhan) PO:MACT02/(South East District) Saket, New Delhi/26.03.2018 MACT No. 963/17 Khushi Ram Vs. Shamshuddin & Ors.
Vijay Prasad Vs. Shamshuddin & Ors. Page 19/19