Delhi District Court
Devender Srivastav vs Santosh Negi on 17 January, 2023
IN THE COURT OF JAGDISH KUMAR: PO:MACT02 SOUTH
WEST): DWARKA COURTS: NEW DELHI
MACT No. 973/17
FIR No. 1573/15
PS: DABRI
Devender Srivastav
S/O Sh Harbeer
R/O C1/81, Madhu Vihar,
Uttam Nagar,
New Delhi ...... Petitioner
VERSUS
Santosh Negi
S/O Sh Raj Pala Negi
R/O B1/154,Gali No.81, Madhu Vihar
New Delhi110059
( Driver cum owner ) ....Respondent
DATE OF INSTITUTION : 30.08.2017
AWARD RESERVED ON : 17.01.2023
DATE OF AWARD : 17.01.2023
FORM - IV B
SUMMARY OF COMPUTATION OF AWARD AMOUNT IN INJURY CASES TO BE INCORPORATED IN THE AWARD
1. Date of accident: 29.12.2015
2. Name of injured: Devender Srivastav
3. Age of the injured: 33 years
4. Occupation of the injured: Tailor
5. Income of the injured: 20,000/ p.m.
6. Nature of injury: Grievous
7. Medical treatment taken by the injured: DDU Hospital New Delhi
8. Period of hospitalization: 04 days MACT No. 973/17 Devender Vs Santosh Negi & ors Page No. 1 of 12
9. Whether any permanent disability ? If yes, give details. No.
10. Computation of Compensation S.No. Heads Awarded by the Tribunal
11. Pecuniary Loss
(i) Expenditure on treatment Rs. 9,000/
(ii) Expenditure on conveyance Rs. 10,000/
(iii) Expenditure on special diet Rs. 10,000/
(iv) Cost of nursing/attendant Rs. 10,000/
(v) Loss of earning capacity Nil
(vi) Loss of income Rs.18,356/
(vii) Any other loss which may require any special Nil treatment or aid to the injured for the rest of his life
12. NonPecuniary Loss:
(i) Compensation for mental and physical shock Rs. 20,000/
(ii) Pain and suffering Rs. 40,000/
(iii) Loss of amenities of life Nil
(iv) Disfiguration Nil
(v) Loss of marriage prospects Nil
(vi) Loss of earning, inconvenience, hardships, As above.
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 of 8% disability as permanent or temporary
(ii) Loss of amenities or loss of expectation of life Nil span on account of disability
(iii) Percentage of loss of earning capacity in Nil relation of disability
(iv) Loss of future income - (Income X%Earning Rs. 9179/ x 12 x 16 x capacity X Multiplier) 04/100)= Rs.70,487.04/ ( MACT No. 973/17 Devender Vs Santosh Negi & ors Page No. 2 of 12 in lump sum 70,500/)
14. TOTAL COMPENSATION Rs.1,87,856/After calculation
15. INTEREST AWARDED 7.5% per annum
16. Interest amount up to the date of compliance As per calculation
17. Total amount including interest As per calculation
18. Award amount released 100%
19. Award amount kept in FDRs Nil
20. Mode of disbursement of the award amount to the claimant (s) (Clause29)
21. Next date for compliance of the award. (Clause 16.02.2023
31) FORM - V COMPLIANCE OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE MODIFIED CLAIMS TRIBUNAL AGREED PROCEXDURE TO BE MENTIONED IN THE AWARD
1. Date of the accident 29.12.2015
2. Date of intimation of the accident by the investigating 30.08.2017 officer to the Claims Tribunal (Clause 2)
3. Date of intimation of the accident by the investigating do officer to the insurance company. (Clause 2)
4. Date of filing of Report under section 173 Cr.P.C. before Not known the Metropolitan Magistrate (Clause 10)
5. Date of filing of Detailed Accident Information Report 30.08.2017 (DAR) by the investigating Officer before Claims Tribunal (Clause 10)
6. Date of Service of DAR on the Insurance Company (Clause N/A
11)
7. Date of service of DAR on the claimant(s). (Clause 11) 30.08.2017
8. Whether DAR was complete in all respects? (Clause 16) Yes
9. If not, whether deficiencies in the DAR removed later on? No
10. Whether the police has verified the documents filed with Yes DAR? (Clause 4) MACT No. 973/17 Devender Vs Santosh Negi & ors Page No. 3 of 12
11. Whether there was any delay or deficiency on the part of the Yes. Directions are Investigating Officer? If so, whether any action/direction being issued as per warranted? Hon'ble High Court to all DCPs/CP, Delhi.
12. Date of appointment of the Designated Officer by the Not known insurance Company. (Clause20)
13. Name, address and contact number of the Designated do Officer of the Insurance Company. (Clause 20)
14. Whether the designated Officer of the Insurance Company No submitted his report within 30 days of the DAR? (Clause
20)
15. Whether the insurance company admitted the liability? If N/A so, whether the Designated Officer of the insurance company fairly computed the compensation in accordance with law. (Clause 23)
16. Whether there was any delay or deficiency on the part of the do Designated Officer of the Insurance Company? If so, whether any action/direction warranted?
17. Date of response of the claimant (s) to the offer of the NA Insurance Company. (Clause 24)
18. Date of the Award 17.01.2023
19. Whether the award was passed with the consent of the No parties? (Clause 22)
20. Whether the claimant(s) were directed to open saving bank Yes account(s) near their place of residence? (Clause 18)
21. Date of order by which claimant(s) were directed to open 12.04.2018 saving 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 an endorsement to this effect on the passbook(s). (Clause 18)
22. Date on which the claimant (s) produced the passbook of 12.10.2022 their saving bank account near the place of their residence along with the endorsement, PAN Card and Aadhar Card? (Clause 18) MACT No. 973/17 Devender Vs Santosh Negi & ors Page No. 4 of 12
23. Permanent Residential Address of the Claimant(s) (Clause R/O C1/81,
27) Madhu Vihar, Uttam Nagar, New Delhi
24. Details of saving bank account(s) of the claimant(s) and the SB A/C No. address of the bank with IFSC Code (Clause 27) 1103101700001979 at Punjab National Bank, Mahavir Enclave Palam Dabri Road Delhi IFSC Code:
PUNB0110310
25. Whether the claimant(s) saving bank account(s) is near his Yes place of residence? (Clause 27)
26. Whether the claimant(s) were examined at the time of No passing of the award.
27. Account number, MICR number IFSC Code, name and Account No. branch of the bank of the Claims Tribunal in which the 37665510911 award amount is to be deposited/transferred MICR Number:
110002483 IFSC Code:
SBIN0011566 State Bank of India, Sector10, Dwarka Courts Complex Branch, New Delhi AWARD
1. Brief facts of the present case are that on 29.12.2015 at about 9:15 P.M, the petitioner was returning back to his home from Sitapuri PartII after his duty. When he was crossing the road near Dwarka Puri bus stop for catching the bus for Madhu Vihar. At that time one motor cycle bearing No. DL9SAG1592 came from opposite side in a very high speed being MACT No. 973/17 Devender Vs Santosh Negi & ors Page No. 5 of 12 driven by its driver in rash and negligent manner and hit him. As a result of which petitioner and alongwith motor cycle rider fell down on the road.
The petitioner received multiple injuries all over his body. The Petitioner was removed to DDU hospital Delhi where his MLC bearing No.11420 was prepared.
2. After completion of investigation, police indicted respondent Santosh Negi as driver cum owner in the DAR. IO filed 'Detailed Accident Report' (DAR) before this tribunal on 30.08.2017 and produced driver cum owner before this tribunal. The offending vehicle was not insured. The DAR was treated as claim application.
3. The Respondent has contested the present case.
4. The Respondent ( driver cum owner ) in the written statement, has submitted that a false FIR was registered against him. No accident took place with his vehicle. He has stated that some unknown vehicle had hit his motor cycle.
5. After completion of the pleadings, following issues were framed on 12.04.2018
1. Whether Devender Srivastav sustained grievous injuries in a motor vehicle accident dt. 29.12.2015 due to rash and negligent driving of vehicle No. DL9SAG1592 being driven and owned by respondent Santosh Negi ? ...OPP.
2. Whether the petitioner in the above mentioned case is entitled to claim compensation , if so , what amount and from whom? ... OPO
3. Relief.
6. In order to prove the present case, in PE, petitioner examined himself as PW1 and PW2 Dr Vimal Sharma from DDU hospital. The Respondent has examined himself as RW1 and has also examined Sh Harish Singh Butola as RW2. in support of his case.
MACT No. 973/17 Devender Vs Santosh Negi & ors Page No. 6 of 12
7. I heard ld. counsels appearing on behalf of petitioner as well as respodent. My issuewise findings are as under: ISSUE No.1: Whether Devender Srivastav sustained grievous injuries in a motor vehicle accident dt. 29.12.2015 due to rash and negligent driving of vehicle No. DL9SAG1592 being driven and owned by respondent Santosh Negi ? ...OPP.
8. The onus to prove this issue is upon the petitioner. To prove the present case, petitioner examined himself as PW1 and in his affidavit (Ex. PW 1/A), he has deposed that it was R.1 who was driving the offending vehicle ie Motor cycle bearing No. DL9SAG1592 in rash and negligent manner, came in a fast speed and hit him when he was crossing the road. He received multiple injuries and he was removed to DDU Hospital, New Delhi.
9. Ld Counsel for respondent ( driver cum owner ) has argued that his vehicle was not involved in the accident. Rather his vehicle was hit by an unknown vehicle. It is further argued that case has been falsely registered against respondent and in this regard a complaint Ex RW1/12 was also made to the higher police officer.
10. After considering the submission of Ld Counsel for the respondent and perusing the record. It reveals from the record that the FIR was registered against the respondent. The number of vehicle find mentioned in the FIR itself. The offending vehicle was seized during the investigation. The injured has also named and identified the respondent as driver of offending vehicle. The respondent was made as an accused after the investigation. The complaint Ex RW1/2 has been made on 03.04.2018 after a considerable time from arrest which is only after thought. And in that complaint respondent has not disclosed the name of his relative RW2 which MACT No. 973/17 Devender Vs Santosh Negi & ors Page No. 7 of 12 creates doubts regarding presence of RW2 at spot. the name of his relative One another argument of Ld Counsel for the respondent is that it was the injured who was under the influence of liquor, hence he is not entitled for any compensation.
11. PW 1 has been crossexamined by respondent. Testimony of the petitioner with respect to accident and rash & negligent driving of offending vehicle has not been impeached. Even otherwise, the proof of negligence while disposing off a claim under MACT, is not that strict as it is under Section 279/338 of IPC. Being injured, petitioner is natural eye witness of the case. Even otherwise strict rule that negligence is to be proved beyond reasonable doubt is not to be proved in MACT proceedings. Considering all these facts, it stands proved that accident in question was caused due to rash or negligent driving of a Motor cycle bearing registration no. DL9SAG1592 by respondent no.1 thereby causing injuries to the petitioner.
12. The issue is decided in favour of the petitioner and against respondent by holding that petitioner suffered injuries in a vehicular accident due to rash and negligent driving of motor cycle bearing registration no. DL9SAG 1592 by respondent no.1.
ISSUE No.2: ? Whether the petitioner in the above mentioned case is entitled to claim compensation , if so , what amount and from whom? ... OPO
13. Being injured, petitioner is well within his rights to claim compensation. It is there on record, as per the deposition of PW 1 and the MLC annexed with DAR, that he was taken to DDU Hospital, Delhi. It is deposed by him (PW1) that due to the said accident, he himself and his family members have suffered great mental pain, agony, love and affection, loss of income, MACT No. 973/17 Devender Vs Santosh Negi & ors Page No. 8 of 12 loss of social activities etc. The petitioner has placed on record the medical bills worth Rs.8136/ PW 1 has remained on medication as revealed from MLC. He has suffered fracture in right his leg. As per MLC there is segmental of his right tibia and he has operated upon for the same. Hence , seeing nature of injuries suffered by petitioner, a lumb sum amount of Rs. 9000/ is granted to him towards medical expenses. Though there is no leave record proved on record. But seeing the nature of injuries on the person of petitioner, which may took considerable time to heal up. So an amount of Rs.18,356/ ( ie two months salary as per minimum wages of unskilled labour prevalent in Delhi ) is awarded to the petitioner for loss of earning. There is no evidence except deposition of petitioner to verify that he spent any amount towards attendant. But seeing the nature of injuries being suffered by petitioner an amount of Rs.10,000/ is being awarded for attendant. Moreover, a sum of Rs. 10,000/ for special diets, Rs.10,000/ for conveyance.
14. PW1 has deposed that he has suffered permanent disability to the extent of 08% due to the accident in relation to right lower limb. PW 2 Dr Vinal Sharma has proved the disability certificate in respect of petitioner vide Ex PW 1/3. He suffered permanent disability of 8% in relation to to right lower limb
15. The petitioner got injuries in the accident caused by R.1 by driving of offending vehicle in rash and negligent manner. As per the disability certificate Ex PW1/3 the petitioner had permanent disability of 8% in relation to right lower limb.
16. Considering the law on disability of injured. His ability to earn in future has to be kept in mind while awarding compensation to injured. In the case in hand, the date of accident is 29.12.2015. At that time the petitioner was MACT No. 973/17 Devender Vs Santosh Negi & ors Page No. 9 of 12 working doing the job of Tailoring and claimed earning of Rs.20,000/ p.m. However he has not filed any documents with regarding to his earning. But considering the facts and circumstances, this Tribunal assessed the income of the petitioner as per Minimum Wages , which were Rs.9178/ in the year 2015. As per disability certificate of the petitioner he has suffered 08% ( Eight percent) permanent disability in relation right lower limb. The petitioner was about 33 years of age at the time of accident.
17. As per the disability certificate Ex.PW1/C the petitioner has suffered 08% permanent disability in relation to his right lower limb. Seeing age and occupation of petitioner, his functional disability is taken as 08% qua the whole body. The functional disability of petitioner is taken as 04% qua the whole body. Counting in this way, his loss to future earnings comes to Rs. 70,487.04 (Rs. 9178/ x 12 x 16 x 04/100). This amount of Rs. 70,487.04 ( in lump sum 70,500/) is allowed to petitioner, as loss of future earnings, due to permanent disability.
18. Apart from amounts mentioned above, petitioner is allowed Rs. 40,000/ for pain and suffering and Rs. 20,000/ for mental & physical shock due to this accident, making a total of Rs. 1,87,856/, detail of which is given as under:
(i) Medical expenses Rs. 9,000/
(ii) Attendant charges Rs. 10,000/
(ii) Special diets Rs. 10,000/
(iii) Conveyance Rs. 10,000/
(iv) Loss of earning during treatment Rs. 18,356/
(v) Pain & suffering Rs. 40,000/
(vi) Mental & physical shock Rs. 20,000/
(vii) Loss of future earnings, due to permanent Rs.70,500/ disability.
Total Rs. 1,87,856/
MACT No. 973/17 Devender Vs Santosh Negi & ors Page No. 10 of 12
19. This issue is therefore decided in favour of the petitioner and against respondent by holding that accident in question took place due to rash or negligent driving of vehicle bearing No. DL9SAG1592 being driven by respondent no.1 and petitioner suffered injuries in that accident and petitioner is entitled for compensation.
20. This issue is therefore decided in favour of the petitioner and against respondent by holding that petitioner is entitled for compensation from respondent no.1 ISSUE No. 3 (RELIEF)
21. Petition in hands is allowed. Respondent no.1 is directed to pay Rs. 1,87,856/with interest @ 7.5% from the date of filing of DAR i.e. 30.08.2017 till the date of compliance to the petitioner as compensation in this case, within 30 days from today. Amount of interim compensation (if any) be deducted from this amount. The awarded amount shall remain as tax free.
22. Considering circumstances of petitioner, entire amount of compensation be released to the petitioner by way of transferring the same in his saving bank account. The petitioner would allowed to withdraw the same through withdrawal slip only and by no other mode/modes i.e. ATM/ debit card/credit card/letter/NEFT/RTGS etc.
23. The salient features as prescribed in the judgment in Rajesh Tyagi Vs. Ramesh Chandra Gupta FAO No. 842/2009 and MAC. App. No. 422/2009 decided on 07.11.2014 are to be applied:
(i) Original fixed deposit receipt be retained by the bank in safe custody. However, the original passbook shall be given to the claimant along with the photocopy of the FDR.
(ii) The original fixed deposit receipt be handed over to the claimant at the end of the fixed deposit period.
MACT No. 973/17 Devender Vs Santosh Negi & ors Page No. 11 of 12
(iii) Photo identity card shall be issued to the claimant and the withdrawal shall be permitted only after due verification by the Bank of the identity card of the claimant.
(iv) No cheque book/ATM/debit card/credit card shall be issued to the claimant without permission of the Court.
(v) No loan, advance or withdrawal or premature encashment shall be allowed on the fixed deposit without permission of the Court.
24. Respondent no.1 is directed to deposit entire amount of compensation with this tribunal, within 30 days from today, with advance notice to petitioner.
25. File be consigned to record room.
ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN (JAGDISH KUMAR )
COURT ON 17.01.2023 PO, MACT02 SOUTH WEST,
DWARKA, NEW DELHI
MACT No. 973/17 Devender Vs Santosh Negi & ors Page No. 12 of 12