Delhi District Court
Rajbir vs . Harinder Kumar & Ors. on 31 July, 2018
1
IN THE COURT OF SH. PARAMJIT SINGH PO : MACT (SOUTHWEST
DISTRICT), DWARKA COURTS: NEW DELHI
MACP No. : 897/16
Rajbir Vs. Harinder Kumar & Ors.
CNR No. DLSW010009492014
1 Rajbir
S/o Sh. Attar Singh
R/o VPO Khaira,
New Delhi. ... Petitioner
Vs
1. Sh. Harinder Kumar (Driver)
S/o Sh. Raj Singh
R/o Flat No. 529, PocketA
Sector13, Dwarka,
New Delhi.
2. Raj Singh (Owner)
S/o Sh. Kesho Ram
R/o H. No. 21A,
Village Bindapur,
New Delhi.
3 Reliance General Insurance
Company Ltd. (Insurer)
A1/172, Janak Puri,
New Delhi. ... Respondents
(MACP Nos.897/16 & 898/16) Rajbir & Suraj .@ Anuj Vs. Harender Kumar & Ors 1/33
2
MACP No. : 898/16
Suraj @ Anuj Vs. Harinder Kumar & Ors.
CNR No. DLSW010009542014
Sh. Suraj @ Anuj
S/o Late Sh. Rajinder Prasad Sharma
R/o RZ13/C56, Dichao Road,
New Hira Park, Najafgarh,
New Delhi ... Petitioner
Vs
1. Sh. Harinder Kumar (Driver)
S/o Sh. Raj Singh
R/o Flat No. 529, PocketA
Sector13, Dwarka,
New Delhi.
2. Raj Singh (Owner)
S/o Sh. Kesho Ram
R/o H. No. 21A,
Village Bindapur,
New Delhi.
3. Reliance General Insurance
Company Ltd. (Insurer)
A1/172, Janak Puri,
New Delhi. ... Respondents
Date of institution of MACP No. 897/16 11.07.2014
Date of institution of MACP No. 898/16 11.07.2014
Date on which, judgment have been reserved09.07.2018
Date of pronouncement of judgment 31.07.2018
(MACP Nos.897/16 & 898/16) Rajbir & Suraj .@ Anuj Vs. Harender Kumar & Ors 2/33
3
FORM V
COMPLIANCE OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE MODIFIED
CLAIMS TRIBUNAL AGREED PROCEDURE TO BE
MENTIONED IN THE AWARD
( In MACP NO. 897/16 Rajbir Vs. Harinder Kumar & Ors.)
1 Date of the accident 16.03.2014
2 Date of intimation of the accident by the Investigating Not clear from record
Officer to the Claims Tribunal ( Clause 2)
3 Date of intimation of the accident by the Investigating Not clear from record
Officer to the Insurance Company (Clause 2)
4 Date of filing of Report under Section 173 Cr. PC before Not clear from record
the Metropolitan Magistrate (Clause 10)
5 Date of filing of Detailed Accident Information Report 11.07.2014
(DAR) by the Investigating Officer before Claims
Tribunal. (Clause 10)
6 Date of service of DAR on the Insurance Company. 11.07.2014
(Clause 11)
7 Date of service of DAR on the claimant (s). (Clause 11) 11.07.2014
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 Yes
DAR? (Clause 4)
11 Whether there was any delay or deficiency on the part of No
the Investigating Officer? If so, whether any action /
direction warranted?
12 Date of appointment of the Designated Officer by the Not clear from record
Insurance company ( Clause 20 )
13 Name, address and contact number of the Designated Not clear from record
Officer of the Insurance Company ( Clause 20 )
14 Whether the Designated Officer of the Insurance No
Company submitted his report within 30 days of the
DAR? ( Clause 22 )
15 Whether the Insurance Company admitted the liability? If No
so, whether the Designated Officer of the Insurance
Company fairly computed the compensation in accordance
with law ( Clause 23 )
(MACP Nos.897/16 & 898/16) Rajbir & Suraj .@ Anuj Vs. Harender Kumar & Ors 3/33
4
16 Whether there was any delay or deficiency on the part of No
the 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 N.A
Insurance Company. ( Clause 24)
18 Date of Award 31.07.2018
19 Whether the award was passed with the consent of the No.
parties? ( Clause 22)
20 Whether the claimant (s) were directed to open savings
bank accounts (s) near their place of residence ? ( Clause Yes
18)
21 Date of order by which claimant(s) were directed to open 05.02.2018
savings bank accounts(s) near his place of residence and
produce PAN Card and Adhaar Card and the direction tot
he 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 18.04.2018
their 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) VPO Khaira, Najafgarh, New
(Clause 27 ) Delhi
24. Details of savings bank account(s) of the claimant(s) and SB A/c no. 91082010026980
the address of the bank with IFSC Code( Clause 27) at Syndicate Bank, Thana Road,
Najafgarh, New Delhi ( IFSC
Code : SYNB0009108)
25 Whether the claimant(s) savings bank account(s) is near Yes
his place of residence ? (Clause 27)
26 Whether the claimant(s) were examined at the time of Yes
passing of the award to ascertain his/their financial
condition? ( Clause 27)
27 Account number, MICR number, IFSC Code, name and Account No. 37665510911 at
branch of the bank of the Claims Tribunal in which the SBI, District Court Complex,
award amount is to be deposited/transferred. Sector10, Dwarka New Delhi,
(IFSC Code SBIN0011566 and
MICR Code 110002483)
(MACP Nos.897/16 & 898/16) Rajbir & Suraj .@ Anuj Vs. Harender Kumar & Ors 4/33
5
FORM V
COMPLIANCE OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE MODIFIED
CLAIMS TRIBUNAL AGREED PROCEDURE TO BE
MENTIONED IN THE AWARD
( In MACP NO. 898/16 Suraj @ Anuj Vs. Harinder Kumar & Ors.)
1 Date of the accident 16.03.2014
2 Date of intimation of the accident by the Investigating Not clear from record
Officer to the Claims Tribunal ( Clause 2)
3 Date of intimation of the accident by the Investigating Not clear from record
Officer to the Insurance Company (Clause 2)
4 Date of filing of Report under Section 173 Cr. PC before Not clear from record
the Metropolitan Magistrate (Clause 10)
5 Date of filing of Detailed Accident Information Report 11.07.2014
(DAR) by the Investigating Officer before Claims
Tribunal. (Clause 10)
6 Date of service of DAR on the Insurance Company. 11.07.2014
(Clause 11)
7 Date of service of DAR on the claimant (s). (Clause 11) 11.07.2014
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 Yes
DAR? (Clause 4)
11 Whether there was any delay or deficiency on the part of No
the Investigating Officer? If so, whether any action /
direction warranted?
12 Date of appointment of the Designated Officer by the Not clear from record
Insurance company ( Clause 20 )
13 Name, address and contact number of the Designated Not clear from record
Officer of the Insurance Company ( Clause 20 )
14 Whether the Designated Officer of the Insurance No
Company submitted his report within 30 days of the
DAR? ( Clause 22 )
15 Whether the Insurance Company admitted the liability? If No
so, whether the Designated Officer of the Insurance
Company fairly computed the compensation in accordance
with law ( Clause 23 )
(MACP Nos.897/16 & 898/16) Rajbir & Suraj .@ Anuj Vs. Harender Kumar & Ors 5/33
6
16 Whether there was any delay or deficiency on the part of No
the 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 N.A
Insurance Company. ( Clause 24)
18 Date of Award 31.07.2018
19 Whether the award was passed with the consent of the No.
parties? ( Clause 22)
20 Whether the claimant (s) were directed to open savings
bank accounts (s) near their place of residence ? ( Clause Yes
18)
21 Date of order by which claimant(s) were directed to open 05.02.2018
savings bank accounts(s) near his place of residence and
produce PAN Card and Adhaar Card and the direction tot
he 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 18.04.2018
their 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) RZ13/C56, Dichao Road,
(Clause 27 ) New Hira Park, Najafgarh,
New Delhi
24. Details of savings bank account(s) of the claimant(s) and SB A/c no. 088800101012872
the address of the bank with IFSC Code( Clause 27) at Corporation Bank, Ratiram
Park, Shivaji Marg, Najafgarh,
New Delhi ( IFSC Code :
CORP0000888)
25 Whether the claimant(s) savings bank account(s) is near Yes
his place of residence ? (Clause 27)
26 Whether the claimant(s) were examined at the time of Yes
passing of the award to ascertain his/their financial
condition? ( Clause 27)
27 Account number, MICR number, IFSC Code, name and Account No. 37665510911 at
branch of the bank of the Claims Tribunal in which the SBI, District Court Complex,
award amount is to be deposited/transferred. Sector10, Dwarka New Delhi,
(IFSC Code SBIN0011566 and
MICR Code 110002483)
(MACP Nos.897/16 & 898/16) Rajbir & Suraj .@ Anuj Vs. Harender Kumar & Ors 6/33
7
JUDGMENT
The present case/DAR (bearing MACP No. 897/16) has been filed qua the injuries caused to petitioner/ injured Rajbir in a road traffic accident.
The connected case/DAR (bearing MACP No. 898/16) has been filed qua the injuries caused to petitioner/ injured Suraj @ Anuj in the same road traffic accident.
2. Brief facts as made out from the abovesaid DAR are that X1 on 16.03.2014 at about 6:15 PM, injured Suraj @ Anuj and Rajbir were going on scooty to their village Khaira and the said scooty was being driven by Suraj and Rajbir was the pillion rider. It is further stated that when they reached near Charch between Dichao village chowk, Najafgarh, a car bearing registration no. DL 4CAP 0756 came from opposite side at very fast speed being driven by its driver rashly and negligently and hit their scooty as a result of which both of them fell down and received injuries on their bodies. It is further stated that after accident, both injured were removed to RTRM hospital and from their injured Rajbir was shifted to Tirath Ram hospital while injured Suraj @ Anuj was taken to DDU hospital, where they received their further treatment. Accordingly, the present case was registered vide FIR No. 164/14 u/s 279/338 IPC at PS BHD Nagar.
On conclusion of the investigation, the present leading case/DAR (bearing MACP No. 897/16) has been filed by the IO qua the injuries sustained by petitioner/ injured Rajbir in the abovesaid accident. Further, the connected DAR (bearing MACP No. 898/16) has been filed by the IO in respect of the injuries sustained by petitioner/ injuredSuraj @ Anuj in the same accident.
(MACP Nos.897/16 & 898/16) Rajbir & Suraj .@ Anuj Vs. Harender Kumar & Ors 7/33 8
3. In their reply, R1 Harender Kumar ( driver) and R2 Raj Singh ( owner of the offending vehicle) have stated that the said respondents have no liability towards the victim as on the alleged date of accident i.e. 16.03.2014, the vehicle bearing no. DL 4CAP 0756 was fully insured with Reliance General Insurance Company Ltd w.e.f. 10.01.2014 to 09.01.2015. It is further stated that the accident was not caused due to rash and negligent driving of R1 nor he was driving the alleged vehicle at high speed and he had never hit the petitioners. It is also stated that R1 was having valid DL at the time of alleged accident and it has been prayed that the petitioners were not entitled to claim any compensation/ damages from R1 & R2.
4. Reply has also been filed on behalf of R3/ Reliance General Insurance Company Ltd., wherein it has been stated that vehicle bearing no. DL 4CAP 0756 was insured with R3/ insurance company vide policy no. 1315542311000434 valid from 10.01.2014 to 09.01.2015 in the name of Raj Singh. It is further stated that injured sustained injuries due to their own fault as when they reached near Church at Dichaon Raod, a truck bearing no. HR 55Q 6294 was going ahead of them and Suraj @ Anuj tried to overtake the said truck from his right side and collided with the insured vehicle bearing no. DL 4CAP 0756 and as such, driver of the offending vehicle bearing no. DL 4CAP 0756 was not at fault and it has been prayed that the present DAR qua injuries sustained by the petitioners/ injured may be dismissed.
5. Since, common question of law and facts were involved in both these cases/DAR bearing MACP No.897/16 & MACP No. 898/16, the common issues were framed and the same were consolidated for the purpose of recording the evidence by treating the case/DAR bearing MACP No. 897/16 as "Leading Case"
(MACP Nos.897/16 & 898/16) Rajbir & Suraj .@ Anuj Vs. Harender Kumar & Ors 8/33 9 vide order dated 10.12.2014 by one of the Ld. Predecessors of this court.
On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed in the abovesaid cases/DAR on 10.12.2014 by one of the Ld. Predecessors of this court :
ISSUES :
1. Whether Rajbir and Suraj sustained injuries in a motor vehicle accident dated 16.03.2014 due to rash or negligent driving of vehicle no. DL 4CAP 0756 by R.1 ? ...OPP
2. Whether the petitioners are entitled to claim compensation, if so, what amount and from whom ? ...OPP
3. Relief.
6. In support of their case, petitioner/injuredRajbir has examined himself as PW1 and petitioner/ injured Suraj @ Anuj has examined himself as PW2. Thereafter, PE was closed on behalf of the petitioners/ injured.
7. In the instant cases, perusal of record reveals that no RE have been led on behalf of the respondents and on 13.01.2016, it was submitted on behalf of the respondents that no RE was to be led and accordingly, RE was closed vide order dated 13.01.2016 passed by Ld Predecessor of this court.
8. I have heard the arguments put forward by Ld. counsels for the petitioners and R3/ insurance company and have carefully gone through record of the case. I have carefully considered the evidence led by the petitioners in support of (MACP Nos.897/16 & 898/16) Rajbir & Suraj .@ Anuj Vs. Harender Kumar & Ors 9/33 10 their case. I have also carefully perused written submissions filed on behalf of the petitioners and R3/ insurance company.
It is pertinent to mentioned here that the arguments have not been addressed in this case on behalf of R1 Harender Kumar and R2 Raj Singh despite opportunity being given.
9. The issuewise findings are as under :
10. ISSUE No. 1Whether Rajbir and Suraj sustained injuries in a motor vehicle accident dated 16.03.2014 due to rash or negligent driving of vehicle no. DL 4CAP 0756 by R.1 ? ...OPP The onus to prove the abovesaid issue no. 1 was upon the petitioners/ injured and in order to discharge the said onus , the petitioners have examined PW1 Rajbir, who has filed his evidence by way of affidavit (Ex. PW1/A), wherein it has been stated that on 16.03.2014 at about 6:15 PM, injured Suraj @ Anuj and Rajbir were going on scooty to their village Khaira and the said scooty was being driven by Suraj and Rajbir was the pillion rider. PW1 further deposed that when they reached near Charch between Dichao village chowk, Najafgarh, a car bearing registration no. DL 4CAP 0756 came from opposite side at very fast speed being driven by its driver rashly and negligently and hit their scooty as a result of which both of them fell down and received injuries on their bodies. PW1 deposed that after accident, he was removed to RTRM hospital, where he got treatment for injuries and thereafter he was shifted to Tirath Ram hospital, where he remained admitted from 17.03.2014 to 19.03.2014 and was operated upon and got other treatment for the injuries sustained by him in the accident.
(MACP Nos.897/16 & 898/16) Rajbir & Suraj .@ Anuj Vs. Harender Kumar & Ors 10/33 11 PW2 Suraj @ Anuj has also filed his evidence by way of affidavit (Ex. PW2/A) and therein he has also deposed about the manner in which the accident was caused in this case and his testimony in this regard is almost on the similar lines as that of PW1 Rajbir.
The important fact is that the abovesaid witnesses i.e. PW1 Rajbir and PW2 Suraj @ Anuj were cross examined on behalf respondent no.3/ insurance company, but nothing material has come on record which could assail the credibility or trustworthiness of this witness.
In his cross examination by the Ld. counsel for R3/Insurance company, PW1 Rajbir denied the suggestion that Rajbir had hit the vehicle bearing no. DL 4CAP 0756 from behind. He further denied the suggestion that Suraj was trying to overtake another vehicle and in that process, he had hit the vehicle bearing no. DL 4CAP 0756. PW1 denied the suggestion that accident took place due to negligence of injured Anuj @ Suraj. PW1 further denied the suggestion that the vehicle bearing no. DL 4CAP 0756 was going ahead of their vehicle in the correct lane or that he was deposing falsely. In his cross examination by the Ld. counsel for R3/Insurance company, PW2 Suraj denied the suggestion that accident had taken place due to his own negligence or that he was deposing falsely. In these circumstances, nothing material has come on record which could shake the credibility of these witnesses qua their deposition regarding the manner in which the accident was caused in this case.
Hence, in view of the above discussion & observations and having regard to the fact and circumstances of the present case, it is evident that petitioners/injured Rajbir and Suraj @ Anuj sustained injuries in motor vehicle accident due to rash and negligent driving of offending vehicle no. DL 4CAP 0756 which was being driven by R1 Harender Kumar, owned by R2 Raj Singh and insured with R3 Reliance General Insurance Company Ltd at the time of accident.
(MACP Nos.897/16 & 898/16) Rajbir & Suraj .@ Anuj Vs. Harender Kumar & Ors 11/33 12 Accordingly, issue no.1 is decided in favour of the petitioners/ injured and against the respondents.
11. ISSUE No. 2Whether the petitioners are entitled to claim compensation, if so, what amount and from whom ? ...OPP The onus to prove the abovesaid issue no. 2 was upon the petitioners/ injured and in order to discharge the said onus in MACP No. 897/16, the petitioners / injured have examined PW1 Rajbir ( petitioner/injured in MACP No. 897/16), who has filed his evidence by way of affidavit (Ex. PW1/A), wherein it has been stated that he had received grievous injuries in the accident caused due to rash and negligent driving of car no. DL 4CAP 0756, being driven by respondent no.1 and after the accident, he was taken to RTRM hospital and from there, he was shifted to Tirath Ram hospital, where he remained admitted from 17.03.2014 to 19.03.2014 and was operated upon and got other treatment for the injuries received in the accident in this case. PW1 further deposed that he has spent Rs.3 lacs on his treatment till date, Rs.30,000/each on conveyance and special diet and Rs.9,000/pm on attendant and has also spent Rs.10,000/pm for about six months on physiotherapy and was likely to spend much more on these heads in future. PW1 deposed that he was doing private job and was earning Rs.15,000/pm at the time of accident and due to accidental injuries, he was unable to earn till date. PW1 has proved his treatment record as Ex. PW1/1 (colly.), medical bills as Ex. PW1/2 (colly.) and copy of his Voter I card as Ex. PW1/3. PW1 has also proved the criminal record i.e. charge sheet, FIR, site plan, mechanical inspection report, arrest memo and MLC as Ex. PW1/4 to as Ex. PW1/9 respectively.
Hence, in view of the above and in view of the material and evidence (MACP Nos.897/16 & 898/16) Rajbir & Suraj .@ Anuj Vs. Harender Kumar & Ors 12/33 13 record, it is clear that petitioner/injured Rajbir sustained injuries in motor vehicle accident due to rash and negligent driving of offending vehicle no. DL 4CAP 0756 which was being driven by R1 Harender Kumar, owned by R2 Raj Singh and insured with R3 Reliance General Insurance Company Ltd at the time of accident and as such, petitioner/injuredRajbir has become entitled to claim compensation for the injuries caused to him in the abovesaid accident.
12. Quantum of compensation payable to the petitioner/injured Rajbir (MACP No. 897/16) is ascertained under the following heads:
13. NATURE AND EXTENT OF INJURIES As per the medical treatment record, (Ex. PW1/1), petitioner/injured Rajbir is a case of post traumatic fracture femur (United ) with weakness of right hip, knee and ankle .
Further, as per Certificate No. RTRMH/II/12/D.C(II)/1314/3571 dated 20.4.2015 issued by RTRM Hospital, Jafarpur, New Delhi, the petitioner/injured Rajbir has suffered 43% temporary disability , which implies that he has not suffered any permanent disability due to the injuries sustained by him in the accident in this case.
14. MEDICINES & TREATMENT In the present case, as per record, the petitioner/injured Rajbir has undergone initial treatment at RTRM Hospital, Jafarpur, New Delhi and thereafter he was shifted to Tirath Ram Hospitals Pvt. Ltd. Gurgaon .
In the instant case, petitioner/injured Rajbir ( PW1) deposed that after accident he was taken to RTRM hospital and from there, he was shifted to Tirath (MACP Nos.897/16 & 898/16) Rajbir & Suraj .@ Anuj Vs. Harender Kumar & Ors 13/33 14 Ram hospital, where he remained admitted from 17.03.2014 to 19.03.2014 and was operated upon and got other treatment for the injuries received in the accident in this case. Further, in regard to the treatment undergone by him, PW1 has placed on record the medical bills, Ex. PW1/2 ( colly.) amounting to Rs. 61,049/. There is no reason to doubt the said bills, Ex. PW1/2 ( colly.). In these circumstances and in view of the material on record, the petitioner / injured is entitled to a sum of Rs. 61,049/ and accordingly , the petitioner/injured Rajbir is awarded the said amount i.e Rs. 61,049 / rounded of to Rs. 61,050/ ( Rupees Sixty One Thousand, Fifty Only ) towards medicines and medical treatment.
15. CONVEYANCE & SPECIAL DIET In the present case, as per the medical treatment record, petitioner/ injured Rajbir is a case of post traumatic fracture femur (United ) with weakness of right hip, knee and ankle. In these circumstances, the petitioner/injured must have visited the hospital / doctors for his 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 he has spent Rs. 30,000/each on conveyance and special diet , however no evidence, documentary or otherwise, in this regard has been brought on record on behalf of the petitioner. Further, it is pertinent to note that from the material on record, it is evident that the petitioner/injured has not suffered any permanent disability due to the injuries sustained in the accident in this case.
Hence, in view of the above and in view of the material on record, petitioner/injured is entitled to a sum of Rs. 20,000/ ( Rupees Twenty Thousand only) towards conveyance. Further, in view of the injuries suffered by him, the (MACP Nos.897/16 & 898/16) Rajbir & Suraj .@ Anuj Vs. Harender Kumar & Ors 14/33 15 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. 20,000/ ( Rupees Twenty Thousand Only) towards expenses for special diet.
16. LOSS OF INCOME In the present case, the petitioner/injured stated that PW1 deposed that he was doing private job and was earning Rs.15,000/pm at the time of accident, however, no documentary evidence in this regard has been placed on record and in absence thereof, the minimum wages during the relevant period i.e Rs. 8,086/ p.m is taken as criteria for calculating the loss of income to the petitioner/injured.
In the instant case, petitioner/injured has suffered post traumatic fracture femur (United ) with weakness of right hip, knee and ankle and has remained hospitalized for about three days . Further, in view of the material on record, it appears that it might have taken about six months for the petitioner/ injured to recover from the said injuries sustained by him in the accident. In these circumstances and in view of the material on record, the petitioner is entitled to a sum of Rs. 8,086/ x 6= Rs. 48,516/ (Rupees Forty Eight Thousand, Five Hundred Sixteen only) under the head ' Loss of Income'.
17. ATTENDANT & PHYSIOTHERAPY CHARGES In the present case, the petitioner/injured has deposed that he has spent a sum of Rs. 9,000/ p.m on attendant till date and he has also spent Rs. 10,000/ p.m for about six months on physiotherapy , however neither the said attendant or physiotherapist have been examined nor any documentary proof regarding the payment being made to the abovesaid attendant or physiotherapist have been (MACP Nos.897/16 & 898/16) Rajbir & Suraj .@ Anuj Vs. Harender Kumar & Ors 15/33 16 brought on record by the petitioner /injured in this case.
In the instant case, the perusal of the record reveals that petitioner / injured Rajbir is a case of post traumatic fracture femur (United ) with weakness of right hip, knee and ankle and he remained hospitalized for about three days due to the said injuries sustained by him in the accident. In these circumstances, the petitioner/injured must have required the services of attendant and physiotherapist for about six months. It is pertinent to note that the petitioner/injured would have also needed an attendant to look after him, 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 shall be entitled to an amount of Rs. 4,000 X 6 = Rs. 24,000/ (Rupees Twenty Four Thousand Only) towards 'Attendant Charges'. Further, the petitioner/injured shall also be entitled to an amount of Rs. 3,000 X 6 = Rs. 18,000/ (Rupees Eighteen Thousand Only) towards ' Physiotherapist Charges'.
18. 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 (MACP Nos.897/16 & 898/16) Rajbir & Suraj .@ Anuj Vs. Harender Kumar & Ors 16/33 17 no element of doubt that the petitioner/injured has suffered post traumatic fracture femur (United ) with weakness of right hip, knee and ankle and has remained hospitalized for about three days due to the said injuries sustained by him. 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. 50,000/ ( Rupees Fifty Thousand only) is awarded to the petitioner towards the head " pain & sufferings".
19. LOSS OF ENJOYMENT OF LIFE AND AMENITIES The petitioner/injured has claimed that he has suffered the enjoyment of life and other amenities on account of the accident. The petitioner/injured was about 35 years of age at the time of accident and has suffered post traumatic fracture femur (United ) with weakness of right hip, knee and ankle and was hospitalized for about three days 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. 30,000/ (Rupees Thirty 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. 20,000/ (Rupees Twenty Thousand only) as compensation for mental and physical shock suffered by him due to the accident in this case.
20. The breakup of compensation that has been awarded to the petitioner/ (MACP Nos.897/16 & 898/16) Rajbir & Suraj .@ Anuj Vs. Harender Kumar & Ors 17/33 18 injured Rajbir (MACP No.897/16) is tabulated as below : S.No. HEADS AMOUNT (in Rupees) 1 Medicines & Treatment Rs.61,050/
2. Conveyance Rs. 20,000/
3. Special Diet Rs. 20,000/
4. Loss of Income Rs. 48,516/
5. Attendant & Physiotherapy charges Rs. 42,000/
6. Pain & Sufferings Rs. 50,000/
7. Loss of Enjoyment of Life and Amenities Rs. 30,000/
8. Compensation for mental and physical shock Rs. 20,000/ Total Rs. 2,91,566/ rounded of to Rs. 2,92,000/
21. 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. 2,92,000/ from the date of filing of petition i.e. 11.7.2014 till realization.
22. RELIEF IN MACP No.897/16 ( Rajbir Vs. Harender Kumar & Ors.) Thus in view of the above discussion & observations and having regard to the fact and circumstances of the present case, an award for a sum of Rs.2,92,000/ (MACP Nos.897/16 & 898/16) Rajbir & Suraj .@ Anuj Vs. Harender Kumar & Ors 18/33 19 (Rupees Two Lacs, Ninety Two Thousand only) alongwith interest @ 9% p.a from the date of filing of the petition i.e 11.7.2014 till realization is passed in favour of the petitioner/injured-Rajbir and against the respondents in case/DAR bearing MACP No.897/16.
23. FORMIVB SUMMARY OF THE COMPUTATION OF AWARD AMOUNT IN INJURY CASES TO BE INCORPORATED IN THE AWARD
i) Date of accident : 16.3.2014
ii). Name of the injured : Rajbir
iii). Age of the injured : 35 years ( at the time of accident)
iv). Occupation of the injured : Private Job (at the time of accident)
v). Income of the injured : Rs. 8,086/ p.m
vi). Nature of injury : Grievous
vii). Medical treatment taken : RTRM Hospital, Jafarpur ,New Delhi & Tirath by the injured Ram Hospitals ,Pvt. Ltd. Gurgaon
viii). Period of hospitalization : About 03 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. 61,050/
(ii) Expenditure on conveyance Rs. 20,000/
(iii) Expenditure on special diet Rs. 20,000/
(MACP Nos.897/16 & 898/16) Rajbir & Suraj .@ Anuj Vs. Harender Kumar & Ors 19/33
20
(iv) Cost of attendant/physiotherapist Rs. 42,000/
(v) Loss of earning capacity
(vi) Loss of income Rs. 48,516/
(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. 20,000/
shock
(ii) Pain and suffering Rs. 50,000/
(iii) Loss of amenities of life Rs. 30,000/
(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 N.A 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. 2,91,566/ rounded of to Rs. 2,92,000/ (MACP Nos.897/16 & 898/16) Rajbir & Suraj .@ Anuj Vs. Harender Kumar & Ors 20/33 21
15. INTEREST AWARDED
16. Interest amount up to the date of award @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of petition i.e. 11.7.2014 till realization.
17. Total amount including interest Rs. 2,92,000/ + interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the petition i.e. 11.7.2014 till realization.
18. Award amount released As per table given below
19. Award amount kept in FDRs As per table given below
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. 10.9.2018 ( Clause 31)
24. The onus to prove the abovesaid issue no. 2 in MACP No. 898/16 was upon the petitioner/injured in the said case namely Suraj @ Anuj and in order to discharge the said onus, PW2 Suraj @ Anuj ( petitioner in MACP No. 898/16) has filed his evidence by way of affidavit (Ex. PW2/A), wherein it has been stated that he had received injuries in the accident caused due to rash and negligent driving of car no. DL 4CAP 0756, being driven by respondent no.1 and after the accident, he was taken to RTRM hospital and from there he was shifted to DDU hospital, where he received treatment for the injuries received in the accident in this case. PW2 further deposed that he has spent Rs.50,000/ on his treatment till date, Rs.30,000/ each on conveyance and special diet and Rs.9,000/pm on attendant and has also spent Rs.10,000/pm for about one month on physiotherapy and was likely to spend much more on these heads in future. PW1 deposed that he was doing private job and (MACP Nos.897/16 & 898/16) Rajbir & Suraj .@ Anuj Vs. Harender Kumar & Ors 21/33 22 was earning Rs.15,000/pm at the time of accident and due to accidental injuries, he was unable to earn for about six months. PW2 also stated that he was relying upon the documents i.e. photocopy of treatment record MarkA, MLC Ex. PW2/1 and Adhar Card.
Hence, in view of the above and in view of the material and evidence record, it is clear that petitioner/injuredSuraj @ Anuj sustained injuries in motor vehicle accident due to rash and negligent driving of offending vehicle no. DL 4CAP 0756 which was being driven by R1 Harender Kumar, owned by R2 Raj Singh and insured with R3 Reliance General Insurance Company Ltd at the time of accident and as such, petitioner/injured Suraj @ Anuj has become entitled to claim compensation for the injuries caused to him in the abovesaid accident.
25. Quantum of compensation payable to the petitioner/injuredSuraj @ Anuj (MACP No. 898/16) is ascertained under the following heads:
26. NATURE AND EXTENT OF INJURIES As per the medical treatment record, petitioner/injured Suraj @ Anuj suffered Lt. Periorbital swelling and abrasion over Rt. Elbow and in his MLC issued by RTRM Hospital, the nature of injuries have been mentioned as 'simple'.
Further , the perusal of the record reveals that petitioner/injured Suraj @ Anuj has not suffered any temporary or permanent disability due to the injuries sustained by him in the accident in this case.
27. MEDICINES & TREATMENT In the present case, as per record, the petitioner/injured has undergone treatment at RTRM hospital, Jafarpur, New Delhi.
(MACP Nos.897/16 & 898/16) Rajbir & Suraj .@ Anuj Vs. Harender Kumar & Ors 22/33 23 In the instant case, the perusal of the record reveals that petitioner/ injured has received his entire treatment from the Government Hospital and no medical bill qua expenses incurred by him on his treatment or medicines, have been placed on record and as such , the petitioner/injured shall not be entitled to any compensation under this head in this case.
28. CONVEYANCE & SPECIAL DIET In the present case, the petitioner/injured has stated that he has incurred expenses of Rs. 30,000/ each on conveyance and special diet, however ,no evidence, documentary or otherwise, in this regard has been brought on record on behalf of the petitioner . Further, it is pertinent to note that as per the medical treatment record, petitioner/injured Suraj @ Anuj has suffered Lt. Periorbital swelling and abrasion over Rt. Elbow and in his MLC issued by RTRM Hospital, the nature of injuries have been mentioned as 'simple'. In these circumstances and in view of the material on record, it is evident that petitioner/injured would not have incurred any expenditure on conveyance or special diet as injuries sustained by him in the accident were simple in nature and as such he would not have required any follow up visits to the hospital or special diet. Hence, the petitioner/injured shall not be entitled to any compensation under these heads in the instant case.
29. LOSS OF INCOME In the instant case, the petitioner/injured has stated that due to accidental injuries, he was unable to earn for about six months, however, no evidence whatsoever, in this regard has been brought on record on behalf of the petitioner. Further, it is pertinent to note that as per the medical treatment record, petitioner/injured Suraj @ Anuj has suffered Lt. Periorbital swelling and abrasion (MACP Nos.897/16 & 898/16) Rajbir & Suraj .@ Anuj Vs. Harender Kumar & Ors 23/33 24 over Rt. Elbow and in his MLC issued by RTRM Hospital, the nature of injuries have been mentioned as 'simple'. In these circumstances and in view of the material on record, it has not been explained on behalf of the petitioner/injured has to how he was unable to earn for about six months when the injuries sustained by him were only abrasions and the said injuries were stated to be simple in nature. Hence, the petitioner/injured shall not be entitled to any compensation under this head in the present case.
30. 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 Lt. Periorbital swelling and abrasion over Rt. Elbow and in his MLC issued by RTRM Hospital, the nature of injuries have been mentioned as 'simple'. 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 and as such , , a sum of Rs. 15,000/ ( Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) is awarded to the petitioner towards the head " pain & sufferings". In addition to this, the petitioner/injured shall also be entitled to a sum of Rs. 5,000/ (Rupees Five Thousand only) as compensation for mental and physical shock suffered by him due to the accident in (MACP Nos.897/16 & 898/16) Rajbir & Suraj .@ Anuj Vs. Harender Kumar & Ors 24/33 25 this case.
31. The breakup of compensation that has been awarded to the petitioner/injured Suraj @ Anuj is tabulated as below : S.No. HEADS AMOUNT (in Rupees)
1. Pain & Sufferings Rs. 15,000/
2. Compensation for mental and physical shock Rs. 5,000/ Total Rs. 20,000/
32. 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. 20,000/ from the date of filing of petition i.e. 11.7.2014 till realization.
33. RELIEF IN MACP No.898/16 ( Suraj @ Anuj Vs. Harender Kumar & Ors.) Thus in view of the above discussion & observations and having regard to the fact and circumstances of the present case, an award for a sum of Rs. 20,000/ (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) alongwith interest @ 9% p.a from the date of filing of the petition i.e 11.7.2014 till realization is passed in favour of the petitioner/injured-Suraj @ Anuj and against the respondents in the case/DAR (MACP Nos.897/16 & 898/16) Rajbir & Suraj .@ Anuj Vs. Harender Kumar & Ors 25/33 26 bearing MACP No.898/16.
34. FORMIVB SUMMARY OF THE COMPUTATION OF AWARD AMOUNT IN INJURY CASES TO BE INCORPORATED IN THE AWARD
i) Date of accident : 16.3.2014
ii). Name of the injured : Suraj @ Anuj
iii). Age of the injured : 27 years ( at the time of accident)
iv). Occupation of the injured : Private Job (at the time of accident)
v). Income of the injured :
vi). Nature of injury : Simple
vii). Medical treatment taken : RTRM Hospital, Jafarpur ,New Delhi by the injured
viii). Period of hospitalization :
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
(ii) Expenditure on conveyance
(iii) Expenditure on special diet
(iv) Cost of attendant/physiotherapist
(v) Loss of earning capacity
(MACP Nos.897/16 & 898/16) Rajbir & Suraj .@ Anuj Vs. Harender Kumar & Ors 26/33
27
(vi) Loss of income
(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. 5,000/
shock
(ii) Pain and suffering Rs. 15,000/
(iii) Loss of amenities of life
(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 N.A 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. 20,000/
15. INTEREST AWARDED
16. Interest amount up to the date of award @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of petition i.e. 11.7.2014 till realization.
(MACP Nos.897/16 & 898/16) Rajbir & Suraj .@ Anuj Vs. Harender Kumar & Ors 27/33 28
17. Total amount including interest Rs. 20,000/ + interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the petition i.e. 11.7.2014 till realization.
18. Award amount released As per table given below
19. Award amount kept in FDRs As per table given below
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. 10.9.2018 ( Clause 31)
35. LIABILITY The offending vehicle was being driven by R1 Harinder Kumar , owned by R2 Raj Singh and insured with R3/Reliance General Insurance Company Ltd. at the time of accident and as such, respondent no. 3/Reliance General Insurance Company Ltd, being the 'principal tort feasor', shall be liable to pay the awarded amount.
36. In the instant case, the award amount shall be deposited /transferred by respondent no. 3/ Reliance General Insurance Company Ltd. in the Account No. 37665510911 of 'MACT (SouthWest), Dwarka Courts, New Delhi ' at State Bank of India, District Court Complex, Sector 10, Dwarka, New Delhi, ( IFSC Code (MACP Nos.897/16 & 898/16) Rajbir & Suraj .@ Anuj Vs. Harender Kumar & Ors 28/33 29 SBIN0011566 and MICR Code 110002483) by RTGS/NEFT/IMPS under intimation, with proof of notice to the claimant/petitioner and his counsel, to the Nazir of this court .
Further, the statements of petitioners/injuredRajbir & Suraj @ Anuj regarding their financial status, needs and liabilities have also been recorded in this case . In view of the said statements of the petitioners/injured and having regard to facts and circumstances of the present case, the award amount qua petitioner/injured Rajbir ( MACP No.897/16) be distributed as follows: S.No. Name Status Amount of Release Amount of Period of Award Amount in Rs. FDR FDR
1. Rajbir Injured Rs.2,92,000/ Rs. 32,000/ Rs. 50,000/ 1 year Rs. 50,000/ 2 years Rs. 50,000/ 3 years Rs. 50,000/ 4 years Rs. 60,000/ 5 years Further,the award amount in respect of petitioner/injured Suraj @ Anuj (MACP No. 898/16) be distributed as follows: S.No. Name Status Amount of Release Amount of Period of Award Amount in Rs. FDR FDR
1. Suraj @ Anuj Injured Rs.20,000/ Rs. 2,000/ Rs. 10,000/ 1 year Rs. 8,000/ 2 years (MACP Nos.897/16 & 898/16) Rajbir & Suraj .@ Anuj Vs. Harender Kumar & Ors 29/33 30
37. Petitioner/injuredRajbir (MACP No. 897/16) produced the passbook of his SB Account No. 91082010026980 at Syndicate Bank, Thana Road, Najafgarh, New Delhi (IFSC Code No. SYNB0009108), wherein it has been endorsed that "Debit Card & Cheque book has been stopped ".
It is being requested on behalf of the petitioner/injuredRajbir that the abovesaid cash amount may be transferred to his aforesaid SB Account at Syndicate Bank, Thana Road, Najafgarh, New Delhi .
Accordingly, the Manager, State Bank of India, District Courts Complex,Sector10, Dwarka, New Delhi is directed to transfer the abovesaid cash amount to the abovesaid SB Account No. 91082010026980 of petitioner/injured Rajbir at Syndicate Bank, Thana Road, Najafgarh, New Delhi and to keep the remaining amount in the form of above mentioned FDRs.
Manager, Syndicate Bank, Thana Road, Najafgarh, New Delhi is directed to release the abovesaid cash amount of Rs. 32,000/ to petitioner/injured Rajbir as per rules, as prayed.
At the time of maturity, the fixed deposit amount shall be credited in the aforesaid savings bank account of petitioner/injured Rajbir.
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 Rajbir .
Manager of the concerned bank is directed not to permit premature encashment or loan qua the abovesaid FDRs to the petitioner/injured Rajbir without the prior permission of this court.
Further, the interest on the said FDRs shall be paid monthly by automatic credit /transfer of interest amount in the aforesaid SB Account of the (MACP Nos.897/16 & 898/16) Rajbir & Suraj .@ Anuj Vs. Harender Kumar & Ors 30/33 31 petitioner/injured Rajbir .
The abovesaid Syndicate Bank, Thana Road, Najafgarh, New Delhi is also directed not to issue any cheque book and / or debit card to the petitioner/injured Rajbir and if the same have already been issued, the said bank is directed to cancel the same and make an endorsement on the pass book that no cheque book or debit card shall be issued to petitioner/injured Rajbir .
Syndicate Bank, Thana Road, Najafgarh, New Delhi shall permit account petitioner/injured Rajbir to withdraw money from his abovesaid saving bank account by means of a withdrawal form . .
38. Petitioner/injured Suraj @ Anuj ( MACP No.898/16) has stated that he is having a SB Account No. 088800101012872 at Corporation Bank, Ratiram Park, Shivaji Marg, Najafgarh, New Delhi ( IFSC Code: CORP0000888 ) and it is being requested on her behalf that the abovesaid cash amount may be transferred to the said SB Account .
Accordingly, the Manager, State Bank of India, District Courts Complex,Sector10, Dwarka, New Delhi is directed to transfer the abovesaid cash amount to the abovesaid SB Account No. 088800101012872 of petitioner/injured Suraj @ Anuj at Corporation Bank, Ratiram Park, Shivaji Marg, Najafgarh, New Delhi and to keep the remaining amount in the form of above mentioned FDRs.
Manager, Corporation Bank, Ratiram Park, Shivaji Marg, Najafgarh, New Delhi is directed to release the abovesaid cash amount of Rs. 2,000/ to petitioner/injured Suraj @ Anuj as per rules, as prayed.
At the time of maturity, the fixed deposit amount shall be credited in the aforesaid savings bank account of petitioner/injured Suraj @ Anuj .
All the original FDRs shall be retained by the concerned bank, (MACP Nos.897/16 & 898/16) Rajbir & Suraj .@ Anuj Vs. Harender Kumar & Ors 31/33 32 however, the statement containing FDR number, amount, date of maturity and maturity amount shall be provided to petitioner/injured Suraj @ Anuj .
Manager of the concerned bank is directed not to permit premature encashment or loan qua the abovesaid FDRs to the petitioner/injured Suraj @ Anuj without the prior permission of this court.
Further, the interest on the said FDRs shall be paid monthly by automatic credit /transfer of interest amount in the aforesaid SB Account of the petitioner/injured Suraj @ Anuj .
The said Corporation Bank, Ratiram Park, Shivaji Marg, Najafgarh, New Delhi is also directed not to issue any cheque book and / or debit card to the petitioner/injured Suraj @ Anuj and if the same have already been issued, the said bank is directed to cancel the same and make an endorsement on the pass book that no cheque book or debit card shall be issued to petitioner/injured Suraj @ Anuj .
Corporation Bank, Ratiram Park, Shivaji Marg, Najafgarh, New Delhi shall permit account petitioner/injured Suraj @ Anuj to withdraw money from his abovesaid saving bank account by means of a withdrawal form .
39. The insurance company shall inform the petitioners as well as their counsel through registered post that the award amount is being transferred/ deposited so as to facilitate the petitioners to know about the deposit in the account.
Copy of this award be sent to the concerned Manager, SBI, District Courts Complex, Sector 10, Dwarka, New Delhi, Manager, Syndicate Bank, Thana Road, Najafgarh, New Delhi and Manager,Corporation Bank, Ratiram Park, Shivaji Magr, Najafgarh, New Delhi for information / compliance.
Copy of this award be also given ''Dasti' to the petitioners/their counsel (MACP Nos.897/16 & 898/16) Rajbir & Suraj .@ Anuj Vs. Harender Kumar & Ors 32/33 33 and Ld. Counsel for the respondent/insurance company.
The main judgment be placed in the file pertaining to the leading/ main case bearing MACP No. 897/16 and the copy thereof be placed in the file of connected case bearing MACP No. 898/16 .
Ahlmad is directed to prepare a separate misc. file and put up the same for filing of the compliance report on 10.9.2018.
File be consigned to the record room.
(Announced in the open (Paramjit Singh)
Court on 31.7.2018) PO, MACT (SouthWest District)
Dwarka Courts, New Delhi
31.7.2018
Digitally
signed by
PARAMJIT
PARAMJIT SINGH
SINGH Date:
2018.07.31
16:16:54
+0530
(MACP Nos.897/16 & 898/16) Rajbir & Suraj .@ Anuj Vs. Harender Kumar & Ors 33/33
34
(MACP Nos.897/16 & 898/16) Rajbir & Suraj .@ Anuj Vs. Harender Kumar & Ors 34/33