Delhi District Court
Anjana vs Sher Singh on 15 January, 2026
IN THE COURT OF SH. MUKESH KUMAR,
PRESIDING OFFICER:MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS
TRIBUNAL-02,WEST,TIS HAZARI COURTS, DELHI
MACT no. 417/2019
DLWT010051472019
1. Sh. Deepak Kumar Choudhary
S/o Sh. Ram Milan Choudhary
R/o A-124, Gori Shankar Enclave-I,
Prem Nagar-III, Kirari Suleman Nagar,
Delhi.
...... Petitioners
Versus
1. Sh. Sher Singh
S/o Sh. Ramji Lal
R/o H. No. 126 FF,
M Block, Guru Harkishan Nagar,
Delhi.
2. Sh. Jasvinder Kumar
S/o Sh. Madan Lal
R/o H. No. C-235, Chandan Vihar,
Near Sani Bazar Road, Nangloi, Delhi.
...... Respondents
AND MACT No. 418/2019 DLWT010051672019
1. Sh. Anjana MACT No. 417/2019 Deepak Kumar Choudhary Vs. Sher Singh & Anr. Date of Award : 15.01.2026 MACT No. 418/2019, Anjana Vs. Sher Singh & Anr. Page No. 1 of 23.
S/o Sh. Ram Milan Choudhary R/o A-124, Gori Shankar Enclave-I, Prem Nagar-III, Kirari Suleman Nagar, Delhi.
...... Petitioners Versus
1. Sh. Sher Singh S/o Sh. Ramji Lal R/o H. No. 126 FF, M Block, Guru Harkishan Nagar, Delhi.
2. Sh. Jasvinder Kumar S/o Sh. Madan Lal R/o H. No. C-235, Chandan Vihar, Near Sani Bazar Road, Nangloi, Delhi.
...... Respondents
Date of Institution : 05.07.2019
Date of reserving order/judgment : 15.01.2026
Date of pronouncement : 15.01.2026
AWAR D
1. Vide this common order, I shall dispose of both the Detailed Accident Reports (DAR) in respect of FIR no. 16/2018 for the injuries sustained by Sh. Deepak Kumar Choudhary S/o Sh. Milan Choudhary (MACT No. 417/2019) and another with regard to the injuries sustained by Smt. Anjana (injured in MACT No. 418/2019) in a motor vehicular accident that took place on 24.12.2017 involving a vehicle bearing No. DL-8S- BT-7943.
2. According to the DAR filed by the IO, documents annexed therewith as well as material available on record, on 24.12.2017, while the petitioner Sh. Deepak Kumar Choudhary brought his sister Anjana from her HTET examination from his MACT No. 417/2019 Deepak Kumar Choudhary Vs. Sher Singh & Anr. Date of Award : 15.01.2026 MACT No. 418/2019, Anjana Vs. Sher Singh & Anr. Page No. 2 of 23. Scooty bearing No. DL-4S-CL-9091 and Ms. Anjana was pillion rider. At about 02:30 PM when they were returning to their home after finishing examination and when they reached at Shiva Garden Wali Gali before Hind Vihar Phatak, in the meantime the offending vehicle bearing No. DL-8S-BT-7943 (motorcycle) which was coming in a very rash and negligent manner and in a high speed and after overtaking another vehicle and brutally hit against the Scooty of the petitioner. As a result of which Sh. Deepak Kumar Choudhary, Ms. Anjana and the driver of the offending vehicle (motorcycle) fell down on the road and thereafter, the driver of the offending vehicle ran away from there. The petitioner Deepak Kumar Choudhary noted the registration number of the offending vehicle and with the help of a car Deepak Kumar Choudhary and Anjana were taken to Sonia Hospital where the Doctors treated both the injured. It is further stated that injured Deepak Kumar Choudhary (Petitioner in MACT no. 417/2019) was medically examined vide MLC No. 3447/2017 and Ms. Anjana (Petitioner in MACT No. 418/2019) was medically examined vide MLC No. 3446/2017. It is also stated that FIR No. 16/2018 PS Mundka was registered on 09.01.2018 with regard to the said accident upon the statement of the petitioner/complainant Deepak Kumar Choudhary.
3. IO filed the DAR giving details of respondent No. 1 being the driver of the offending vehicle; that the respondent no. 2 being the owner of the offending vehicle. The offending vehicle was stated to be without insurance at the time of accident. DAR was also accompanied by other relevant documents including final report u/s 173 Cr.PC; MLC of petitioner Sh. Deepak Kumar Choudhary and Ms. Anjana; Site plan of the place MACT No. 417/2019 Deepak Kumar Choudhary Vs. Sher Singh & Anr. Date of Award : 15.01.2026 MACT No. 418/2019, Anjana Vs. Sher Singh & Anr. Page No. 3 of 23. of accident; Seizure memos of both the vehicles and documents of the offending vehicle; Mechanical inspection report of both the vehicles; Notice u/s 133 M.V. Act given to the owner of the offending vehicle and its reply; Arrest memo of accused (respondent no.1 herein); Statement of witnesses u/s 161 CrPC etc.
4. In the written statement filed on behalf of respondent no.1/driver, it is stated inter alia that the respondent no.1 was falsely implicated in the present matter and the present DAR is nothing but gross misuse and abuse of the process of law. It is further stated that the respondent no. 2/owner of the vehicle took a friendly loan of Rs. 50,000/-from the respondent no. 1 in the first week of October, 2018 and promised to repay within 15 days but he failed to pay the same, therefore, in the first week of November, 2018 he mortgaged the motorcycle bearing No. DL-8S-BT-7943 with the respondent no. 1 stating the he will clear his entire loan within one month and took back his motorcycle. It is further stated that on 10.11.2018 respondent no. 1 received a phone call from PS Mundka and he was directed to bring the said motorcycle to PS. It is further stated that when the respondent no. 1 produced the said vehicle in the PS, owner of the vehicle was also present there and he stated that vehicle is to be deposited in the PS as the same is involved in some case. It is further stated that respondent no. 1 deposited the vehicle in the PS and his signatures were obtained on blank papers on the pretext of investigation. It is further stated that the respondent no. 1 is not liable to pay any compensation to the claimants if any compensation is to be payable to the claimants, then it is the owner of the alleged vehicle who is liable to pay the same to the MACT No. 417/2019 Deepak Kumar Choudhary Vs. Sher Singh & Anr. Date of Award : 15.01.2026 MACT No. 418/2019, Anjana Vs. Sher Singh & Anr. Page No. 4 of 23. claimants.
5. In the written statement / reply filed on behalf of the respondent no. 2/Jasvinder Singh, it is stated inter alia that the offending vehicle was in the name of respondent no. 2 but the same had been the away by the respondent no. 1 in the month of October, 2016 and since then the same is in the possession and under control of the respondent no. 2 and respondent no. 2 has nothing to di with the said offending vehicle. It is further stated that the respondent no. 2 had borrowed Rs. 20,000/- from the respondent no. 1 but due to his financial condition he could not able to return the same to respondent no. 1. It is further stated that in the month of October, 2016, the respondent no. 1 came to his house and taken away his motorcycle lying in front of his house without his permission and consent in his absence. It is further stated that respondent no. 2 asked the respondent no. 1 and his son to return the said motorcycle but they did not do so rather got signed some sale documents and since then the same is under control of respondent no. 1 and his son and respondent no. 2 has nothing to do with the said vehicle. It is further stated that the respondent no. 2 is not aware about the alleged accident taken place on 22.12.2017 or 24.12.2017 as alleged in the FIR dated 09.01.2018. It is further stated that there is delay of almost 16-18 days in registration of FIR and there are discrepancies in the investigation conducted by the IO in this case and no statement was taken at the spot from the locals who witnessed the alleged accident. It is further stated that there is delay in recording the statement of the claimants without any reasonable cause. It is further stated that neither the respondent no. 2 had permitted and consented the respondent no. 1 to drive the said offending vehicle MACT No. 417/2019 Deepak Kumar Choudhary Vs. Sher Singh & Anr. Date of Award : 15.01.2026 MACT No. 418/2019, Anjana Vs. Sher Singh & Anr. Page No. 5 of 23. without transferring the same in the name nor he was aware who was driving the said vehicle on the date of accident. It is further stated that the offending vehicle was insured when the same was in the possession and control of the respondent no. 2 and the respondent no. 1 deliberately and intentionally did not get insured the offending vehicle taken aware from the possession of respondent no. 2 without his permission and consent. It is further stated that respondent no. 2 after six month of taking away the said offending vehicle asked the respondent no. 1 and his son to return the said vehicle but they replied that they had already transferred the said offending vehicle in the name of respondent no. 1 Sher Singh as a result of which the respondent no. 2 did not make any complaint to the police or any authority. It is further stated that the present DAR has been filed with the connivance of respondent no. 1 and the injured persons against the respondent no. 2 in order to extort money.
6. It is pertinent to mention here that vide order dated 05.07.2019 passed by Ld. Predecessor of this Tribunal, both the above-mentioned matters i.e. bearing No. 417/2019 and 418/2019 were clubbed and it was also directed that DAR bearing No. 417/2019 shall be treated as main DAR and original documents, evidence etc. shall be kept therein.
7. From the pleadings of the parties, following issues were framed in both the cases bearing No. 417/2019 and 418/2019 by the Ld. Predecessor of this Tribunal on 06.11.2020:-
1. Whether the petitioner Deepak Kumar Chaudhary and Ms. Anjana suffered injuries in a vehicular accident that took place on 24.12.2017 at about 02:30 PM at near Shiva Garden Wali Gali, near Hind Vihar, Phatak Nangloi, MACT No. 417/2019 Deepak Kumar Choudhary Vs. Sher Singh & Anr. Date of Award : 15.01.2026 MACT No. 418/2019, Anjana Vs. Sher Singh & Anr. Page No. 6 of 23.
Delhi involving a motorcycle bearing No. DL-8S-BT-7943, driven by respondent no.1 Sher Singh, owned by respondent no. 2 Jasvinder Singh and vehicle was uninsured? OPP
2. Whether the petitioners are entitled for compensation? If so, to what amount and from whom?
3. Relief.
8. In order to prove their case, petitioners got examined two witnesses. PW1 is Sh. Deepak Kumar Choudhary (Petitioner in MACT no. 417/2019) and PW2 is Ms. Anjana (Petitioner in MACT no. 418/2019).
9. Respondent no. 1 examined himself as R1W1.
10. No witness was examined on behalf of the respondent no. 2.
11. I have heard arguments and have gone through the record carefully and my issue wise findings are as under :
Issue No.1 (In both the cases).
12. It is the settled proposition of law that an action founded on the principle of fault liability, the proof of rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle is sine qua non. However, the standard of proof is not as strict as applied in criminal cases and evidence is to be tested on the touchstone of preponderance of probabilities. Holistic view is to be taken while dealing with the Claim Petition based upon negligence. Strict rules of evidence are not applicable in an inquiry conducted by the Claims Tribunal. Reference may be made to the judgments titled as New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Sakshi Bhutani & Others., MAC APP. No. 550/2011 decided on 02.07.2012, Bimla Devi & Others v. Himachal Road Transport Corporation & Others (2009) 13 SC 530, Parmeshwari v. Amirchand & Others MACT No. 417/2019 Deepak Kumar Choudhary Vs. Sher Singh & Anr. Date of Award : 15.01.2026 MACT No. 418/2019, Anjana Vs. Sher Singh & Anr. Page No. 7 of 23. 2011 (1) SCR 1096 & Mangla Ram v. Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. & Others 2018, Law Suit (SC) 303.
13. PW-1 Sh. Deepak Kumar Choudhary (petitioner in MACT Case No. 417/2019) tendered his affidavit in evidence and relied upon the documents i.e. copy of his Aadhar card Ex.PW1/1 (OSR).
14. PW-2 Ms. Anjana (petitioner in MACT Case No. 418/2019) tendered his affidavit in evidence and relied upon the documents i.e. (i) Discharge summary Mark A; (2) Treatment papers Mark B; (3) DAR Ex.PW1/1; (4) ID card of petitioner Ex.PW1/2 and (5) Bills Ex.PW1/3.
15. For the purpose of this issue, the testimony of injured/PW-1 Deepak Kumar Choudhary (Petitioner in MACT no. 417/2019) is very relevant who is also the eye witness of the incident. He filed an affidavit in evidence, which is Ex.PW1/A, wherein he deposed inter alia on 24.12.2017, while the petitioner Sh. Deepak Kumar Choudhary brought his sister Anjana for her HTET examination from his Scooty bearing No. DL-4S- CL-9091 and Ms. Anjana was pillion rider. At about 02:30 PM when he was returning to his home after finishing examination along with his sister and when they reached at Shiva Garden Wali Gali before Hind Vihar Phatak, in the meantime the offending vehicle bearing No. DL-8S-BT-7943 (motorcycle) which was coming in a very rash and negligent manner and in a high speed and after overtaking another vehicle and brutally hit against the Scooty of the petitioner. As a result of which Sh. Deepak Kumar Choudhary, Ms. Anjana and the driver of the offending vehicle (motorcycle) fell down on the road and thereafter, the driver of the offending vehicle ran away from there. The petitioner MACT No. 417/2019 Deepak Kumar Choudhary Vs. Sher Singh & Anr. Date of Award : 15.01.2026 MACT No. 418/2019, Anjana Vs. Sher Singh & Anr. Page No. 8 of 23. Deepak Kumar Choudhary noted the registration number of the offending vehcile and with the help of a car Deepak Kumar Choudhary and Anjana were taken to Sonia Hospital where the Doctors treated both the injured.
16. In his cross examination done by the Ld. Counsel for the respondent no. 1, he stated that it is correct that in para no. 2 of the affidavit, date 22.12.2017 has been changed to 24.12.2017. It is correct that I have not put counter signature on the corrections. The said correction were done at my instance by my Advocate. It is correct that the figures mentioned in para no. 3 of affidavit was not done in my handwriting. It is wrong to suggest that I have manipulated the date and time of incident. In order to get the false claim before this Tribunal and that is why there is discrepancies in content of charge sheet and my affidavit. At this stage, the content of charge sheet has been read by the witness and he accepts that the date of incident has been mentioned as 22.12.2017. Read over portion has been marked as PW-1X1. I have given my statement to the police officer before the registration of FIR, after 2-3 days of the incident. Both parties were called at the Police Station Mundka by the investigating officer for compromise/settlement but the same could not be settled. It is correct that I have not stated the above mentioned facts in my affidavit Ex.PW1/A. Thereafter, I went at my home with the help of police officials namely Sanjay Nirwal, then SHO PS Uttam Nagar, the present FIR got registered on 09 th day of January, 2018. Neither my statement nor any complaint was recorded by the police officer in the present case. I have never joined the investigation in the present case after the registration of present FIR. I do not remember the timings of the MACT No. 417/2019 Deepak Kumar Choudhary Vs. Sher Singh & Anr. Date of Award : 15.01.2026 MACT No. 418/2019, Anjana Vs. Sher Singh & Anr. Page No. 9 of 23. examination on the date of incident. The examination centre was situated at Faridabad, Haryana. I do not know the distance between the examination centre and my home. After the examination we reached at the spot of accident in approximately 3 hours. I do not remember the timings when I reached the spot, however, I clicked the photographs of the offending vehicle's plate. The offending vehicle was overtaking the Chota Hathi (loading tempo) at the time of the incident. The driver of the offending vehicle has already pass the Chota Hathi at the time of incident. .............. I have not made any PCR call at the time of incident and even after reaching hospital. No PCR or call on 100 number was made in the present case. The insurance of my Scooty has already elapsed about 1 or 2 months prior to the incident. I am aware about the fact that it is illegal and contrary to the law for driving vehicle without insurance. I was discharged immediately from the hospital after getting medical aid. I have never visited the spot of accident with the police officer after registration of FIR. It is correct that I have not filed any separate claim petition. I do not tell about the accident or the offending vehicle to the treating doctor. It is correct that I have not filed any documents or proof to substantiate my averments regarding my income proof, medical treatments, Conveyance, special diet, disability as stated by me in para-3 of my affidavit Ex.PW1/A. I have not filed any medical documents which suggested that I will have to spend Rs. 5,000/-for future treatment. It is correct that I have not mention the details of savings of parents which they spent on my treatment. It is wrong to suggest that I did not disclose the offending vehicle number in the MLC to the doctor. It is wrong to suggest that no such MACT No. 417/2019 Deepak Kumar Choudhary Vs. Sher Singh & Anr. Date of Award : 15.01.2026 MACT No. 418/2019, Anjana Vs. Sher Singh & Anr. Page No. 10 of 23. accident from the said vehicle had taken place or me and my sister had suffered injuries at the different time and different place due to my own negligence and the present case has been filed belatedly after manipulating the facts with the help of Sanjay Nirwal, then SHO Uttam Nagar in order to get the false claim before this Hon'ble Tribunl. It is wrong to suggest that I have not handed over the mobile phone to the investigating officer because I have not clicked any photographs of the number plate of the offending vehicle. It is wrong to suggest that I am deposing falsely.
17. PW1 Ms. Anjana, who is the injured as well as eye- witness of the accident in question, is a very material witness, who has deposed about the mode and manner of the accident in question. She has categorically deposed that accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle by its driver. There is nothing material elicited from his cross examination which would impeach his credibility or cast any doubt over his trustworthiness. There is no cogent evidence available on record to hold that accident had either taken place due to the negligence or contributory negligence on his part while driving the scooty. Rather, evidence of PW-1 remained consistent on the aspect of accident, having been caused by rash and negligent driving of respondent no.1. It is evident from the testimony of PW-1 that respondents could not impeach his testimony through litmus test of cross-examination. Said witness is found to have successfully withstood the test of cross- examination. PW-1 himself is the injured having sustained injuries due to the accident in question. There is no reason as to why he would depose falsely against respondent no. 1. The MACT No. 417/2019 Deepak Kumar Choudhary Vs. Sher Singh & Anr. Date of Award : 15.01.2026 MACT No. 418/2019, Anjana Vs. Sher Singh & Anr. Page No. 11 of 23. testimony of PW-1 remained unimpeachable on the aspect of accident in question. There is no possibility of false implication of respondent no. 1 and/or false involvement of offending vehicle at the instance of petitioners herein.
18. Moreover, it is an undisputed fact that FIR No. 16/2018 PS Mundka was registered with regard to accident in question. Copy of said FIR (which is part of final report U/s 173 CrPC filed by the petitioner) would show that same was registered on 09.01.2018. Ld. Counsel for the respondents have argued that the accident has been took place on 24.12.2017 and FIR has been lodged on 09.01.2018 after sixteen days. On the issue of delay in lodging the FIR, Ld. Counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on the judgment titled as Ravi Vs, Badrinarayan & ors. cited as AIR 2011 Supreme Court 1226 wherein it is held as under :
"20. It is well-settled that delay in lodging FIR cannot be a ground to doubt the claimant's case. Knowing the Indian conditions as they are, we cannot expect a common man to first rush to the Police Station immediately after an accident. Human nature and family responsibilities occupy the mind of kith and kin to such an extent that they give more importance to get the victim treated rather than to rush to the Police Station. Under such circumstances, they are not expected to act mechanically with promptitude in lodging the FIR with the Police. Delay in lodging the FIR thus, cannot be the ground to deny justice to the victim. In cases of delay, the courts are required to examine the evidence with a closer scrutiny and in doing so; the contents of the FIR should also be scrutinized more carefully. If court finds that there is no indication of fabrication or it has not been concocted or engineered to implicate innocent persons then, even if there is a delay in lodging the FIR, the claim case cannot be dismissed merely on that ground.
21. The purpose of lodging the FIR in such type of cases is primarily to intimate the police to initiate investigation of criminal offences. Lodging of FIR certainly proves factum of accident so that the victim MACT No. 417/2019 Deepak Kumar Choudhary Vs. Sher Singh & Anr. Date of Award : 15.01.2026 MACT No. 418/2019, Anjana Vs. Sher Singh & Anr. Page No. 12 of 23.
is able to lodge a case for compensation but delay in doing so cannot be the main ground for rejecting the claim petition. In other words, although lodging of FIR is vital in deciding motor accident claim cases, delay in lodging the same should not be treated as fatal for such proceedings, if claimant has been able to demonstrate satisfactory and cogent reasons for it. There could be variety of reasons in genuine cases for delayed lodgment of FIR. Unless kith and kin of the victim are able to regain a certain level of tranquility of mind and are composed to lodge it, even if, there is delay, the same deserves to be condoned. In such circumstances, the authenticity of the FIR assumes much more significance than delay in lodging thereof supported by cogent reasons".
19. Furthermore, PW1 Deepak Kumar Choudhary has also relied upon the DAR filed by the IO, which includes the final report u/s 173 Cr.PC in FIR No. 16/2018; MLC of petitioner Sh. Deepak Kumar Choudhary; MLC of petitioner Ms. Anjana; Site plan of the place of accident; Seizure memos of both the vehicles and documents of the offending vehicle; Mechanical inspection report of both the vehicles; Notice u/s 133 M.V. Act given to the owner of the offending vehicle and its reply; Arrest memo of accused (respondent no.1 herein); Statement of witnesses u/s 161 CrPC etc. Respondent no. 1 namely Sher Singh (accused in State case) has been charge-sheeted (which is part of copies of criminal case available on record) for offences punishable U/s 279/337/338 IPC by the investigating agency after arriving at the conclusion on the basis of investigation carried out by it that the accident in question had occurred due to rash and negligent driving of offending vehicle by the respondent no. 1. Same also points out towards the rashness and negligence of the respondent no. 1 to that extent. The investigation was duly carried out which revealed not only the involvement of the vehicle, but also that it was the offending vehicle which was MACT No. 417/2019 Deepak Kumar Choudhary Vs. Sher Singh & Anr. Date of Award : 15.01.2026 MACT No. 418/2019, Anjana Vs. Sher Singh & Anr. Page No. 13 of 23. being driven in a rash and negligent manner which resulted in the accident.
20. Moreover, apart from petitioner, the respondent no. 1 Sh. Sher Singh tendered his affidavit Ex.RW1/A. In his cross examination he deposed that he has not filed any complaint against the FIR No. 16/2018 and has also not filed any document relating from loan amount. R1W1 admitted in his cross examination that he was the driver of the offending vehicle.
21. Thus, in view of the aforesaid discussion and the evidence which has come on record, it is held that the petitioners have been able to prove on the scale of preponderance of probabilities that petitioners namely Deepak Kumar Choudhary and Ms. Anjana sustained injuries in the road accident which took place on 24.12.2017 at Shiva Garden Wali Gali before Hind Vihar Phatak, due to rash and negligent driving of offending vehicle by the respondent no. 1. Accordingly issue no.1 stands decided in favour of petitioners and against the respondents. Issue No.2
22. In view of the finding on issue no.1, petitioners are entitled to get compensation, however, the quantum of compensation still needs to be adjudicated. Section 168 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 enjoins upon the claim Tribunal to hold an inquiry into the claim to make an award determining the amount of compensation, which appears to be just and reasonable. As per settled law, compensation is not expected to be windfall or a bonanza nor it should be pittance. A man is not compensated for the physical injury, he is compensated for the loss which he suffers as a result of that injury.
COMPENSATION IN MACT NO. 417/2019 MACT No. 417/2019 Deepak Kumar Choudhary Vs. Sher Singh & Anr. Date of Award : 15.01.2026 MACT No. 418/2019, Anjana Vs. Sher Singh & Anr. Page No. 14 of 23. (Injured Deepak Kumar Choudhary) Medical Expenses:
23. PW1 Sh. Devender Kumar Choudhary i.e. the injured himself, has inter alia deposed in his evidence by way of affidavit Ex.PW1/A that 24.12.2017, while the petitioner Sh. Deepak Kumar Choudhary brought his sister Anjana for her HTET examination from his scooty bearing No. DL-4S-CL-9091 and Ms. Anjana was pillion rider. At about 02:30 PM when he was returning to his home after finishing examination along with his sister and when they reached at Shiva Garden Wali Gali before Hind Vihar Phatak, in the meantime the offending vehicle bearing No. DL-8S-BT7943 (motorcycle) which was coming in a very rash and negligent manner and in a high speed and after overtaking another vehicle and brutally hit against the scooty of the petitioner. As a result of which Sh. Deepak Kumar Choudhary, Ms. Anjana and the driver of the offending vehicle (motorcycle) fell down on the road and thereafter, the driver of the offending vehicle ran away from there.
24. No medical bills has been placed on record by the petitioner / injured Deepak Kumar Choudhary in support of his plea of incurring expenditure on his hospitalization / medication. As per the MLC of the injured Deepak Kumar Choudhary placed on record, he has suffered simple injuries. It is evident on record that he met with an accident while driving his scooty, where both the scooty and the motorcycle riders fell down on the road due to the rash and negligent driving of offending vehicle by its driver and petitioner Deepak Kumar Choudhary and Ms. Anjana sustained injuries. In these circumstances, even in the absence of any medical bills filed and proved on record by the injured MACT No. 417/2019 Deepak Kumar Choudhary Vs. Sher Singh & Anr. Date of Award : 15.01.2026 MACT No. 418/2019, Anjana Vs. Sher Singh & Anr. Page No. 15 of 23. Deepak Kumar Choudhary and taking note of the nature of his injuries, I find it appropriate to award a notional amount of Rs.10,000/- to the petitioner Deepak Kumar Choudhary under this head for medical expenses.
Loss of Income on account of accident
25. There is no document placed and proved on record by the petitioner to prove his vocation and monthly income. There is no other witness got examined by the petitioner in support thereof. As per Aadhar Card, the petitioner is a resident of Delhi. Thus, for want of cogent and definite evidence being led by petitioner with regard to his actual monthly income, this Tribunal assesses the income of the injured to be at parity with minimum wages of unskilled person in the State of Delhi which at the time of accident i.e. 24.12.2017 was Rs. 13,584/- per month. Further, considering the totality of circumstances as well as nature of injuries suffered by him and material placed on record, this Tribunal is of considered view that he would not have been able to work for a period of three month. Thus, an amount of Rs. 40,752/- (Rs. 13,584/- x 3) is granted to the petitioner on account of loss of income due to the accident in question. Special Diet, Conveyance Charges & Attendant Charges
26. There is no document placed and proved on record by the petitioner in support of his plea for incurring expenses under this head, however, at the same time, it cannot be overlooked that he had sustained injuries in the accident. Thus, he would have taken special rich protein diet for his speedy recovery and would have also incurred some amount towards conveyance charges while commuting to the concerned hospital as OPD patient for his regular checkup and follow up during the MACT No. 417/2019 Deepak Kumar Choudhary Vs. Sher Singh & Anr. Date of Award : 15.01.2026 MACT No. 418/2019, Anjana Vs. Sher Singh & Anr. Page No. 16 of 23. period of his medical treatment. He would also have been definitely helped by some person either outsider or from his family, to perform his daily activities as also while visiting the hospital during the course of his medical treatment. In the absence of any such documentary proof, this Tribunal while taking into consideration nature of injuries suffered by petitioner as well as surrounding circumstances, finds it appropriate to grant a notional sum of Rs.10,000/- towards conveyance charges; a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards special diet and a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards attendant charges to the petitioner.
27. Thus, the compensation awarded to the petitioner Deepak Kumar Choudhary is summarized as under:-
S Heads of Compensation Amount
No.
1. Medical expenses Rs. 10,000/-
2 Loss of income Rs. 40,752/-
3. Conveyance Rs. 10,000/-
4. Special diet Rs. 10,000/-
5. Attendant charges Rs. 10,000/-
Total Rs. 80,752/-
28. Thus, the total compensation amount to which the petitioner Deepak Kumar Choudhary is entitled comes to Rs. 80,752/- (Rupees Eighty Thousand Seven Hundred and Fifty Two Only).
COMPENSATION IN MACT NO. 418/2019 (Injured Anjana) Medical Expenses:
29. PW-1 Ms. Anjana i.e. the injured has inter alia deposed in her evidence by way of affidavit that after the accident, he was immediately taken to Sonia Hospital where the petitioner was MACT No. 417/2019 Deepak Kumar Choudhary Vs. Sher Singh & Anr. Date of Award : 15.01.2026 MACT No. 418/2019, Anjana Vs. Sher Singh & Anr. Page No. 17 of 23. examined and treated. He has filed on record the treatment record Mark A and Mark B and original bills Ex.PW1/3.
30. In support of his medical expenses, petitioner has filed and relied upon medical bills and medical treatment record. The aforesaid medical bills amounting to Rs. 81,259/-. The aforesaid medical bills remained undisputed on the part of respondents and there is no reason to disbelieve the same. In view thereof, the aforesaid bill amount of Rs. 81,259/- is awarded to the petitioner under this head for medical expenses. .
Loss of Income on account of accident
31. There is no document placed and proved on record by the petitioner to prove her vocation and monthly income. There is no other witness got examined by the petitioner in support thereof. As per Aadhar Card, the petitioner is a resident of Delhi. Thus, for want of cogent and definite evidence being led by petitioner with regard to his actual monthly income, this Tribunal assesses the income of the injured to be at parity with minimum wages of unskilled person in the State of Delhi which at the time of accident i.e. 24.12.2017 was Rs. 13,584/- per month. Further, considering the totality of circumstances as well as nature of injuries suffered by him and material placed on record, this Tribunal is of considered view that he would not have been able to work for a period of three month. Thus, an amount of Rs. 81,504/- (Rs. 13,584/- x 6) is granted to the petitioner on account of loss of income due to the accident in question. Special Diet, Conveyance Charges & Attendant Charges
32. There is no document placed and proved on record by the petitioner in support of his plea for incurring expenses under this head, however, at the same time, it cannot be MACT No. 417/2019 Deepak Kumar Choudhary Vs. Sher Singh & Anr. Date of Award : 15.01.2026 MACT No. 418/2019, Anjana Vs. Sher Singh & Anr. Page No. 18 of 23. overlooked that he had sustained injuries in the accident. Thus, he would have taken special rich protein diet for his speedy recovery and would have also incurred some amount towards conveyance charges while commuting to the concerned hospital as OPD patient for his regular checkup and follow up during the period of his medical treatment. He would also have been definitely helped by some person either outsider or from his family, to perform his daily activities as also while visiting the hospital during the course of his medical treatment. In the absence of any such documentary proof, this Tribunal while taking into consideration nature of injuries suffered by petitioner as well as surrounding circumstances, finds it appropriate to grant a notional sum of Rs.20,000/- towards conveyance charges; a sum of Rs.20,000/- towards special diet and a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards attendant charges to the petitioner.
33. Thus, the compensation awarded to the petitioner Anjana is summarized as under:-
S Heads of Compensation Amount
No.
1. Medical expenses Rs. 81,259/-
2 Loss of income Rs. 81,504/-
3. Conveyance Rs. 20,000/-
4. Special diet Rs. 20,000/-
5. Attendant charges Rs. 10,000/-
Total Rs. 2,12,763/-
34. Thus, the total compensation amount to which the petitioner Anjana is entitled comes to Rs. 2,12,763/- (Rupees Two Lacs Twelve Thousand Seven Hundred Sixty Three Only). INTEREST ON AWARD (in both the cases)
35. Petitioners shall also be entitled to interest at the rate MACT No. 417/2019 Deepak Kumar Choudhary Vs. Sher Singh & Anr. Date of Award : 15.01.2026 MACT No. 418/2019, Anjana Vs. Sher Singh & Anr. Page No. 19 of 23. of 9% per annum on the award amount from the date of filing of the DAR i.e. 05.07.2019 till realization.
LIABILITY (in both the cases)
36. Now the question arises as to which of the respondent is liable to pay the compensation amount. The offending vehicle was without insurance at the time of accident. In such circumstances, this Tribunal holds that the amount of compensation shall be payable by the respondent no. 1 and 2 i.e. Sher Singh and Jasvinder Singh, driver and owner of the offending vehicle, jointly and severally. Issue no. 2 is decided accordingly.
RELIEF (in MACT No. 417/2019)
37. In view of my finding on issues no. 1 and 2, this Tribunal awards a compensation of Rs. 80,752/- (Rupees Eighty Thousand Seven Hundred and Fifty Two Only) (including interim award amount, if any) alongwith interest at the rate of 9% per annum in favour of petitioners w.e.f. date of filing of DAR i.e. 05.07.2019 till realization. The respondent no. 1 and 2 are directed to deposit the award amount with State Bank of India, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi in the MACT Account of this Tribunal having Account no. 40714429271, IFSC Code. SBIN0000726 Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi, within 30 days from today. The respondent no. 1 and 2 are also directed to give notice regarding deposit of the said amount to the petitioners.
RELIEF (in MACT No.418/2019)
38. In view of my finding on issues no. 1 and 2, this Tribunal awards a compensation of Rs. 2,12,763/- (Rupees Two Lacs Twelve Thousand Seven Hundred Sixty Three Only) (including interim award amount, if any) alongwith interest at the MACT No. 417/2019 Deepak Kumar Choudhary Vs. Sher Singh & Anr. Date of Award : 15.01.2026 MACT No. 418/2019, Anjana Vs. Sher Singh & Anr. Page No. 20 of 23. rate of 9% per annum in favour of petitioner from the date of filing of DAR i.e. 05.07.2019 till realization. The respondent no. 1 and 2 are directed to deposit the award amount with State Bank of India, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi in the MACT Account of this Tribunal having Account no. 40714429271, IFSC Code. SBIN0000726 Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi, within 30 days from today. The respondent no. 1 and 2 are also directed to give notice regarding deposit of the said amount to the petitioner. Disbursement of Award Amount (in MACT No. 417/2019)
39. Statement of petitioner in terms of provisions of MCTAP was recorded on 17.12.2025. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the said statement, it is hereby ordered that the entire award amount of Rs. 80,752/- (Rupees Eighty Thousand Seven Hundred and Fifty Two Only) alongwith interest shall be immediately released to the petitioner through his saving bank account.
40. Respondent no. 1 and 2, being driver and owner of offending vehicle, are directed to deposit the compensation amount in both the cases with State Bank of India, Tis Hazari Courts branch within 30 days as per above order, failing which respondent no. 1 and 2 shall be liable to pay interest @ 12% per annum for the period of delay. Concerned Manager, State Bank of India, Tis Hazari Courts branch is directed to transfer the award amount alongwith interest, as stated herein above, in the MACT saving bank accounts of claimants/petitioners respectively, on completing necessary formalities as per rules.
41. Copy of this award alongwith one photograph, specimen signature, copy of bank passbook and copy of residence proof of the petitioner, be sent to Nodal Officer of MACT No. 417/2019 Deepak Kumar Choudhary Vs. Sher Singh & Anr. Date of Award : 15.01.2026 MACT No. 418/2019, Anjana Vs. Sher Singh & Anr. Page No. 21 of 23. State Bank of India, Tis Hazari Courts branch, Delhi for information and necessary compliance.
42. Form XV, Form XVI and Form XVII in terms of MCTAP are annexed herewith as Annexure-A.
43. A separate file be prepared for compliance report by the Nazir .
44. A copy of this award be given to the parties free of cost.
45. A copy of this award be sent to the concerned Ld. Judicial Magistrate First Class as well as DSLSA as per the provisions of the Modified Claim Tribunal Agreed Procedure (MCTAP).
Disbursement of Award Amount (in MACT No. 418/2019)
46. Statement of petitioner in terms of provisions of MCTAP was recorded on 17.12.2024. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the said statement, it is hereby ordered that the entire award amount of Rs. 2,12,763/- (Rupees Two Lacs Twelve Thousand Seven Hundred Sixty Three Only) alongwith interest shall be immediately released to the petitioner through his saving bank account.
47. Respondent no. 1 and 2, being driver and owner of offending vehicle, are directed to deposit the compensation amount in both the cases with State Bank of India, Tis Hazari Courts branch within 30 days as per above order, failing which respondent no. 1 and 2 shall be liable to pay interest @ 12% per annum for the period of delay. Concerned Manager, State Bank of India, Tis Hazari Courts branch is directed to transfer the award amount alongwith interest, as stated herein above, in the MACT saving bank accounts of claimants/petitioners MACT No. 417/2019 Deepak Kumar Choudhary Vs. Sher Singh & Anr. Date of Award : 15.01.2026 MACT No. 418/2019, Anjana Vs. Sher Singh & Anr. Page No. 22 of 23. respectively, on completing necessary formalities as per rules.
48. Copy of this award alongwith one photograph, specimen signature, copy of bank passbook and copy of residence proof of the petitioner, be sent to Nodal Officer of State Bank of India, Tis Hazari Courts branch, Delhi for information and necessary compliance.
49. Form XV, Form XVI and Form XVII in terms of MCTAP are annexed herewith as Annexure-A.
50. A separate file be prepared for compliance report by the Nazir .
51. A copy of this award be given to the parties free of cost.
52. A copy of this award be sent to the concerned Ld. Judicial Magistrate First Class as well as DSLSA as per the provisions of the Modified Claim Tribunal Agreed Procedure (MCTAP). MUKESH Digitally signed by MUKESH KUMAR KUMAR Date: 2026.01.15 16:13:49 +0530 Announced in the open Court (MUKESH KUMAR) on 15.01.2026. P.O. MACT-02 (WEST) THC/Delhi/15.01.2026.
MACT No. 417/2019 Deepak Kumar Choudhary Vs. Sher Singh & Anr. Date of Award : 15.01.2026 MACT No. 418/2019, Anjana Vs. Sher Singh & Anr. Page No. 23 of 23.