Delhi District Court
Ramesh Pandey vs Neeraj Khokhar on 21 April, 2025
IN THE COURT OF SHRI TARUN YOGESH
LD. PO-MACT-01, SOUTH-WEST DISTRICT,
DWARKA COURTS, NEW DELHI
MACT No.1377/17
CNR No. DLSW01-015827-2017
FIR No.448/2017
P.S. Kapashera
In the matter of:
1) Sh. Ramesh Pandey
S/o Sh. Ishwar Pandey,
R/o Dairy Farm-32,
P-Add- Pargati, P.O. Kanheli,
P.S. Sarari Akil, District Kaushambi
Uttar Pradesh.
... (Petitioner)
Versus
1) Ms. Neeraj Khokhar
D/o Sh. Mukhtyar Singh
R/o H. No. 1262, Sector-3,
Rohtak (Haryana). ... (Driver)
2) Sh. Mukhtyar Singh
S/o Sh. Mange Ram
R/o H. No. 1262, Sector-3,
Rohtak (Haryana). ...(Owner)
3) Universal Sompo General Insurance Co. Ltd.
...(Insurance company)
... Respondents
Date of Institution : 28.11.2017
Date of judgment : 21.04.2025
MACT No. 1377/2017 Ramesh Pandey Vs. Neeraj Khokhar & Ors. Page 1 of 24
FORM - V
COMPLIANCE OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE
MODIFIED CLAIMS TRIBUNAL AGREED PROCEDURE
TO BE MENTIONED IN THE AWARD
1. Date of the accident 01.11.2017
2. Date of intimation of the accident by the Not Available
investigating officer to the Claims Tribunal
(Clause 2)
3. Date of intimation of the accident by the Not Available
investigating officer to the insurance company.
(Clause 2)
4. Date of filing of Report under section 173 Cr.P.C. Not Available
before the Metropolitan Magistrate (Clause 10)
5. Date of filing of Detailed Accident Information 28.11.2017
Report (DAR) by the investigating Officer before
Claims Tribunal (Clause 10)
6. Date of Service of DAR on the Insurance Not Available
Company (Clause 11)
7. Date of service of DAR on the claimant(s). 28.11.2017
(Clause 11)
8. Whether DAR was complete in all respects? Yes
(Clause 16)
9. If not, whether deficiencies in the DAR removed N/A
later on?
10. Whether the police has verified the documents Yes
filed with DAR? (Clause 4)
11. Whether there was any delay or deficiency on the No
part of the Investigating Officer? If so, whether
any action/direction warranted?
12. Date of appointment of the Designated Officer by N/A
the insurance Company (Clause 20)
13. Name, address and contact number of the N/A
Designated Officer of the Insurance Company.
(Clause 20)
14. Whether the designated Officer of the Insurance Not Available
Company submitted his report within 30 days of
the DAR? (Clause 20)
MACT No. 1377/2017 Ramesh Pandey Vs. Neeraj Khokhar & Ors. Page 2 of 24
15. Whether the insurance company admitted the Not Available
liability? If 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 N/A
part of the 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 No
the Insurance Company. (Clause 24)
18. Date of the Award 21.04.2025
19. Whether the award was passed with the consent Yes
of the parties? (Clause 22)
20. Whether the claimant(s) were directed to open Yes
saving bank account(s) near their place of
residence? (Clause 18)
21. Date of order by which claimant(s) were directed 16.01.2018
to open 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 03.03.2025
passbook of their saving bank account near the
place of their residence along with the
endorsement, PAN Card and Aadhar Card?
(Clause 18)
23. Permanent Residential Address of the Claimant(s) R/o Dairy Farm-32,
(Clause 27) P-Add- Pargati, P.O.
Kanheli, P.S. Sarari
Akil, District
Kaushambi, Uttar
Pradesh
24. Details of saving bank account(s) of the S.B Account
claimant(s) and the address of the bank with IFSC No.38309387849
Code (Clause 27) with SBI Bank,
Vasant Kunj, New
MACT No. 1377/2017 Ramesh Pandey Vs. Neeraj Khokhar & Ors. Page 3 of 24
Delhi (IFSC Code:
SBIN0008524)
25. Whether the claimant(s) saving bank account(s) Yes
is near his/her place of residence? (Clause 27)
26. Whether the claimant(s) were examined at the Yes
time of passing of the award to ascertain his/their
financial condition? (Clause 27)
27. Account number, MICR number IFSC Code, Account No.
name and branch of the bank of the Claims 42709452600 at SBI
Tribunal in which the award amount is to be Dwarka, Sector-10,
deposited/transferred. Dwarka Courts
Complex, IFSC Code:
SBIN0011566 &
MICR No.
110002483.
AWAR D
Preface
1. Detailed Accident Report (DAR) has been filed seeking
compensation for bodily injury sustained in motor vehicle
accident.
Background
2. Brief facts necessary and germane for deciding the case are that Ramesh Pandey riding Hero Splendor Motorcycle No.DL- 12SJ-3365 met with an accident near Samalkha Traffic Signal, Dwarka Link Road, Delhi on 01.11.2017 between 7:00 - 7:15 am after his motorcycle was hit by Hyundai Xcent Car No.HR-12A- 6544 driven by respondent Neeraj Khokhar in rash and negligent manner. Injured was shifted to AIIMS Trauma Centre where MLC No.500058859/2017 was prepared recording 'Laceration Over Left Ankle' which was opined grievous.
3. FIR No.448/2017 under section 279/338 IPC was registered at PS Kapashera on 01.11.2017 and site-plan was MACT No. 1377/2017 Ramesh Pandey Vs. Neeraj Khokhar & Ors. Page 4 of 24 prepared at the instance of injured. Respondent Neeraj Khokhar (driver) was formally arrested and released on police bail and Hero Splendor Motorcycle No.DL-12SJ-3365 and Hyundai Xcent Car No. HR-12A-6544 involved in the accident were released on superdari after their mechanical inspection. Documents including DL, RC and Policy of offending Car were verified from concerned authorities and IO, thereafter, concluded investigation and prepared DAR which was filed in Court along with copy of Final Report under section 279/338 IPC. Defence
4. Respondents Neeraj Khokhar (driver) and Mukhtyar Singh (owner) joined proceedings but did not file any reply.
5. Respondent Universal Sompo General Insurance Co. Ltd. on its part has filed 'Legal Offer' with the condition to revise compensation upon production of Original Medical Bills, Discharge Slip, Medical Record, etc. Inquiry
6. Following issues were settled on 16.01.2018 and matter was posted for petitioner's evidence.
i. Whether Ramesh Pandey sustained grievous injuries in a motor vehicle accident dt. 01.11.2017 due to rash and negligent driving of vehicle no. HR-12AA- 6544 being driven by respondent no. 1 Neeraj Khokhar, owned by respondent no. 2 Mukhtyar Singh and insured by respondent no. 3 Universal Sompo General Insurance Co. Ltd.? ... OPP ii. Whether the petitioner in the above mentioned case is entitled to claim compensation, if so, what amount and from whom? ...OPP MACT No. 1377/2017 Ramesh Pandey Vs. Neeraj Khokhar & Ors. Page 5 of 24 iii. Relief.
7. Witnesses examined in support of application seeking compensation for bodily injury include:
i. PW-1 Sh. Ramesh Pandey who has tendered affidavit Ex.PW-1/A in evidence and inter alia deposed about - (i) grievous injury on left lower leg and multiple injuries all over the body sustained in motor vehicle accident near Samalkha Traffic Signal, Dwarka Link Road, Delhi on 01.11.2017 at about 7:00 am after Hero Splendor Motorcycle No.DL-12SJ- 3365 was hit by Hyundai Xcent Car No. HR-12A-6544 driven by respondent Neeraj Khokhar in rash and negligent manner;
(ii) treatment at JPN Apex Trauma Centre, Delhi & Ortho Plus Hospital, Gopal Nagar, Najafgarh; (iii) monthly income Rs.18,000/- by supplying Dairy Products (iv) expenses incurred on treatment, medicines, conveyance, attendant & special diet AND (v) general and special damages consequent to bodily injury sustained in road accident. He has also relied upon - (a) MLC No.500058859/2017 - Ex.PW-1/1; (b) Discharge Summary of Ortho Plus Hospital, Gopal Nagar, Najafgarh - Ex.PW-1/2; (c) Certificate advising bed rest for 60 days - Ex.PW-1/3; (d) Copy of Aadhar Card - Ex.PW-1/4 AND (e) OPD Card & Medical Bills - Ex.PW-1/5 (Colly).
ii. PW-2 Dr. Sandeep Singhal, SR (Ortho), DDU Hospital, New Delhi being summoned witness has identified his signature at point 'A' upon Disability Certificate No. F.1(1)/DDU/MB/2018/9451 dated 15.06.2018 referred as Ex.PW-2/A. iii. PW-3 Dr. Vinal Sharma, CMO, DDU Hospital, Hari Nagar, New Delhi being summoned witness has brought Original File MACT No. 1377/2017 Ramesh Pandey Vs. Neeraj Khokhar & Ors. Page 6 of 24 of Disability Certificate No.F.1(1)/DDU/MB/2019/10323 dated 20.09.2019 wherein patient Ramesh Pandey is mentioned as case of 'Post Traumatic Left Ankle Stiffness with Permanent Disability of 20% (Twenty Percent) in relation to Left Lower Limb'.
8. Cross-examination of PW-1 Ramesh Pandey, PW-2 Dr. Sandeep Singhal & PW-3 Dr. Vinal Sharma by Ld. counsel for insurance company has been recorded and petitioner's evidence was closed on 07.10.2024.
9. No witness has been examined by insurance company and respondents' evidence was closed on 30.11.2024. Discussion and Conclusion
10. Advocate Ms. Namarata Bhatnagar, Ms. Sarita and Ms. Yukta Verma for injured AND Advocate Sh. Mehtab Singh for Universal Sompo General Insurance Co. Ltd. have addressed their submissions.
11. I have carefully perused pleadings and evidence adduced on judicial file. My issue wise finding is recorded below:
12. Issue No.1:
Whether Ramesh Pandey sustained grievous injuries in a motor vehicle accident dt. 01.11.2017 due to rash and negligent driving of vehicle no. HR-12AA- 6544 being driven by respondent no. 1 Neeraj Khokhar, owned by respondent no. 2 Mukhtyar Singh and insured by respondent no. 3 Universal Sompo General Insurance Co. Ltd.? ... OPP
13. PW-1 Ramesh Pandey has deposed about grievous injuries on left lower leg and multiple injuries all over the body sustained in motor vehicle accident near Samalkha Traffic Signal, Dwarka MACT No. 1377/2017 Ramesh Pandey Vs. Neeraj Khokhar & Ors. Page 7 of 24 Link Road, Delhi on 01.11.2017 at about 7:00 am after Hero Splendor Motorcycle No.DL-12SJ-3365 was hit by Hyundai Xcent Car No. HR-12A-6544 driven by respondent Neeraj Khokhar in rash and negligent manner. MLC No.500058859/2017 of injured prepared at JPN Apex Trauma Centre has been referred as Ex.PW-1/1 whereas Discharge Summary of Ortho Plus Hospital, Gopal Nagar, Najafgarh has been referred as Ex.PW-1/2.
14. Testimony of PW-1 Ramesh Pandey has remained consistent and PW-1 has deposed about motorcycle being hit by offending vehicle while he was trying to cross a parked Truck from the left side.
15. Respondent Neeraj Khokhar (driver) despite being indicted of rash and negligent driving of Xcent Car No. HR-12A-6544 has not entered the witness-box to rebut the allegation and adverse inference is required to be raised against the driver as per the dicta of Hon'ble High Court of Orissa in National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Durdadshya Kumar Samal & Ors. 1987 SCC Online Ori. 57 AND Cholamandalam MS General Insurance Co. Vs. Smt. Kamlesh & Ors. decided by Hon'ble High Court of Delhi on 11th November, 2008.
16. It is well settled law that negligence of the driver in case of road traffic accident is required to be established on the touchstone of preponderance of probability and standard of proof beyond reasonable doubt does not apply to claim petitions under Motor Vehicle Act as held by Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in para 15 of Bimla Devi & Ors. Vs. Himachal Road Transport Corporation & Ors (2009) 13 SCC 530.
MACT No. 1377/2017 Ramesh Pandey Vs. Neeraj Khokhar & Ors. Page 8 of 2417. Following observations in para 15 of aforesaid judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court being relevant are extracted herein below:
"15. In a situation of this nature, the Tribunal has rightly taken a holistic view of the matter. It was necessary to be borne in mind that strict proof of an accident caused by a particular bus in a particular manner may not be possible to be done by the claimants. The claimants were merely to establish their case on the touchstone of preponderance of probability. The standard of proof beyond reasonable doubt could not have been applied...."
18. Similar observation has been recorded by Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in para 12 of its judgment delivered in National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Smt. Pushpa Rana & Ors. 2007 SCC Online Del 1700 by holding that proceedings under Motor Vehicle Act are not akin to proceeding in a civil suit hence strict rules of evidence are not required to be followed and FIR against the driver along with criminal record of the case showing completion of investigation by the police leading to Final Report are sufficient proof to reach the conclusion that the driver was negligent.
19. FINDING: Issue No.1 is therefore decided by holding that bodily injury suffered by Ramesh Pandey in road accident on 01.11.2017 was caused as a result of rash and negligent driving of Hyundai Xcent Car No. HR-12A-6544 by R1/Neeraj Khokhar (driver) which vehicle was registered in the name of R2/Mukhtyar Singh (owner) and insured with R3/Universal Sompo General Insurance Co. Ltd.
20. Issue No.2 MACT No. 1377/2017 Ramesh Pandey Vs. Neeraj Khokhar & Ors. Page 9 of 24 Whether the petitioner in the above mentioned case is entitled to claim compensation, if so, what amount and from whom? ... OPP
21. Sh. Ramesh Pandey having suffered bodily injury in motor vehicle accident was shifted to JPN Apex Trauma Centre, AIIMS, New Delhi where MLC No.500058859/2017 was prepared recording 'Laceration Over Left Ankle' which was opined grievous. Nature of injury was diagnosed as (i) Fracture of Both Bone Left Leg AND (ii) Bimalleolar Fracture of Left Ankle and injured thereafter underwent ORIF with TBW & P/C K.Wire Fixation under S.A on 07.11.2017 in course of treatment at Ortho Plus Hospital, Gopal Nagar, Najafgarh from 07.11.2017 to 11.11.2017.
22. Applications seeking medical examination of injured for ascertaining nature and degree of disability were allowed on 05.05.2018 & 05.08.2019 and Disability Certificate No.F.1(1)/ DDU/MB/2019/10323 dated 20.09.2019 assessing 20% (Twenty Percent) permanent physical disability in relation to Left Lower Limb' has been proved as Ex.PW-3/1 (OSR). Injured Ramesh Pandey is therefore entitled to be compensated for pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage consequent to grievous injury sustained in motor vehicle accident. Quantum of compensation is required to be assessed separately under pecuniary and non-pecuniary heads.
23. At the outset, it has to be borne in mind that compensation is not expected to be a windfall or a bonanza nor it should be niggardly and Courts & Tribunals have a duty to weigh the various factors and quantify the amount of compensation which should be just. What would be "just" compensation is a vexed question. There can be no golden rule applicable to all cases for MACT No. 1377/2017 Ramesh Pandey Vs. Neeraj Khokhar & Ors. Page 10 of 24 measuring the value of human life or a limb. Measure of damages cannot be arrived at by precise mathematical calculations. It would depend upon the particular facts and circumstances, and attending peculiar or special features, if any, as held by Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Helen C. Rebello Vs. Maharasthra SRTC, 1999 (1) SCC 90.
24. Following para of judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in R.D. Hattangadi Vs. Pest Control (India) Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. (1995) 1 SCC 551 being relevant is extracted herein below:
"9. Broadly speaking while fixing an amount of compensation payable to a victim of an accident, the damages have to be assessed separately as pecuniary damages and special damages. Pecuniary damages are those which the victim has actually incurred and which are capable of being calculated in terms of money; whereas non-pecuniary damages are those which are incapable of being assessed by arithmetical calculations. In order to appreciate two concepts pecuniary damages may include expenses incurred by the claimant: (i) medical attendance; (ii) loss of earning of profit up to the date of trial; (iii) other material loss. So far non-pecuniary damages are concerned, they may include (i) damages for mental and physical shock, pain and suffering, already suffered or likely to be suffered in future; (ii) damages to compensate for the loss of amenities of life which may include a variety of matters i.e. on account of injury the claimant may not be able to walk, run or sit; (iii) damages for the loss of expectation of life, i.e., on account of injury the normal longevity of the person concerned is shortened; (iv) inconvenience, hardship, discomfort, disappointment, frustration and mental stress in life."MACT No. 1377/2017 Ramesh Pandey Vs. Neeraj Khokhar & Ors. Page 11 of 24
25. Heads of compensation under pecuniary and non- pecuniary damages have been further explained by Hon'ble Apex Court in para 6 of Raj Kumar Vs. Ajay Kumar & Anr. (2011) 1 SCC 343 which reads as under:
"6. The heads under which compensation is awarded in personal injury cases are the following:
Pecuniary damages (Special Damages)
(i) Expenses relating to treatment, hospitalization, medicines, transportation, nourishing food, and miscellaneous expenditure.
(ii) Loss of earnings (and other gains) which the injured would have made had he not been injured, comprising :
(a) Loss of earning during the period of treatment;
(b) Loss of future earnings on account of permanent disability.
(iii) Future medical expenses.
Non-pecuniary damages (General
Damages)
(iv) Damages for pain, suffering and trauma as a consequence of the injuries.
(v) Loss of amenities (and/or loss of prospects of marriage).
(vi) Loss of expectation of life (shortening of normal longevity).
In routine personal injury cases, compensation will be awarded only under heads (i), (ii)(a) and (iv). It is only in serious cases of injury, where there is specific medical evidence corroborating the evidence of the claimant, that compensation will be granted under any of the heads (ii)(b), (iii),
(v) and (vi) relating to loss of future earnings on account of permanent disability, future medical expenses, loss of amenities (and/or MACT No. 1377/2017 Ramesh Pandey Vs. Neeraj Khokhar & Ors. Page 12 of 24 loss of prospects of marriage) and loss of expectation of life.
NATURE AND EXTENT OF INJURIES
26. Injured Ramesh Pandey being diagnosed with (i) Fracture of Both Bone Left Leg AND (ii) Bimalleolar Fracture of Left Ankle at JPN Apex Trauma Centre, AIIMS, New Delhi has undergone ORIF with TBW & P/C K.Wire Fixation under S.A on 07.11.2017 in course of treatment at Ortho Plus Hospital, Gopal Nagar, Najafgarh from 07.11.2017 to 11.11.2017.
27. No other document has been filed on record or relied in evidence to show any other injury.
MEDICINES AND TREATMENT
28. PW-1 Ramesh Pandey in para 5 of affidavit Ex.PW-1/A has deposed to have spent more than Rs.80,000/- on medicines and additional Rs.50,000/- likely to be incurred on future operation. Aggregate sum of Rs.45,172/- (Rupees Forty Five Thousand One Hundred Seventy Two only) against Medical Bill & Cash Memos of Ortho Plus Hospital, Gopal Nagar, Najafgarh referred as Ex.PW-1/5 (Colly.) is awarded to injured towards expenses incurred on Medicine & Treatment.
29. Though, a sum of Rs.50,000/- is stated to be likely to be incurred on future operation, however, it is well settled law that compensation for future medical expenses is to be granted only in serious cases of injury where there is specific medical evidence corroborating the evidence of the claimant regarding need for further treatment and cost thereof as held in paras 6 & 7 of the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Raj Kumar Vs. Ajay Kumar & Anr. (Supra). Injured Ramesh Pandey MACT No. 1377/2017 Ramesh Pandey Vs. Neeraj Khokhar & Ors. Page 13 of 24 is therefore not entitled to any further compensation towards future medical expenses.
CONVEYANCE AND SPECIAL DIET
30. Injured Ramesh Pandey was taken to JPN Apex Trauma Centre, AIIMS Delhi on 01.11.2017 & 02.11.2017 and underwent ORIF with TBW & P/C K.Wire Fixation under S.A on 07.11.2017 in course of treatment at Ortho Plus Hospital, Gopal Nagar, Najafgarh from 07.11.2017 to 11.11.2017. He, thereafter, continued to visit DDU Hospital, New Delhi till 20.03.2018. It is assumed that injured might have used private vehicle/hired taxi for visiting hospital for treatment till 20.03.2018 and accordingly a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) is awarded towards conveyance. Similarly, injured Ramesh Pandey might have also needed special diet for full and complete recovery from
(i) Fracture of Both Bone Left Leg AND (ii) Bimalleolar Fracture of Left Ankle. Another sum of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand only) is therefore awarded towards special diet. ATTENDANT CHARGES
31. Petitioner having suffered (i) Fracture of Both Bone Left Leg AND (ii) Bimalleolar Fracture of Left Ankle resulting in 20% permanent physical disability must have needed an attendant to assist him for around 04 months even if such gratuitous service was rendered by some or the other of his family/relatives. Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in Delhi Transport Corporation and Anr. Vs. Kumari Lalita 1982 SCC Online Delhi 123 has held that the victim cannot be deprived of compensation towards gratuitous service rendered by some of his family member. Accordingly, in the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of material on record, petitioner Ramesh MACT No. 1377/2017 Ramesh Pandey Vs. Neeraj Khokhar & Ors. Page 14 of 24 Pandey is awarded Rs.8,000/- x 4 = Rs.32,000/- (Rupees Thirty Two Thousand only) towards attendant charges. LOSS OF INCOME
32. PW-1 Sh. Ramesh Pandey in para 3 & 6 of affidavit Ex.PW-1/A has deposed about - (i) monthly income Rs.18,000/- by supplying Dairy Products AND (ii) injured having remained bed-ridden for around six months. He has also relied upon Medical Certificate dated 17.12.2017 issued by Dr. S.N. Mishra, MBBS, Ortho recommending absence from duty for 60 days w.e.f. 07.11.2017.
33. Injured Ramesh Pandey, nonetheless, has not adduced any document verifying monthly income Rs.18,000/-. Since injured having studied up to 7th standard could not complete Matriculate Examination so monthly income in the absence of cogent evidence is taken as per minimum wage of 'Unskilled Worker' @ Rs.13,584/- applicable in Delhi w.e.f. 01.04.2017.
34. Having suffered (i) Fracture of Both Bone Left Leg AND
(ii) Bimalleolar Fracture of Left Ankle, it is assumed that injured Ramesh Pandey would have taken around four months to recover from injuries sustained in road accident. He is, therefore, awarded Rs.13,584/- x 04 months = Rs.54,336/- (Rupees Fifty Four Thousand Three Hundred & Thirty Six only) towards loss of earning in course of treatment & recovery from fracture injury.
PAIN AND SUFFERING
35. Following factors are to be taken into account for assessing compensation under the head - Pain and Suffering:
i. Nature of injury;
ii. Parts of body where injuries occurred;MACT No. 1377/2017 Ramesh Pandey Vs. Neeraj Khokhar & Ors. Page 15 of 24
iii. Surgeries, if any;
iv. Confinement in hospital;
v. Duration of the treatment.
36. Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in para 9 of Arvind Kumar Mishra Vs. New India Assurance Co. Ltd. & Anr. (2010) 10 SCC 254 has observed that whole idea in case of assessment of all damages for personal injury is to put the claimant in the same position as he was insofar as money can. Perfect compensation is hardly possible but one has to keep in mind that the victim has done no wrong; he has suffered at the hands of wrongdoer and Court must take care to give him full and fair compensation for that he had suffered.
37. Petitioner having suffered (i) Fracture of Both Bone Left Leg AND (ii) Bimalleolar Fracture of Left Ankle in motor vehicle accident was treated at JPN Apex Trauma Centre, AIIMS, New Delhi and thereafter underwent ORIF with TBW & P/C K.Wire Fixation under S.A on 07.11.2017 in course of treatment at Ortho Plus Hospital, Gopal Nagar, Najafgarh from 07.11.2017 to 11.11.2017. He has been also assessed with 20% permanent physical disability in relation to Left Lower Limb by the Medical Board of DDU Hospital, Delhi. Considering the nature of injury, hospitalization and duration of treatment, a sum of Rs. Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) is awarded towards 'Pain & Suffering' in addition to Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) as damage for 'Mental and Physical Shock' on account of bodily injury sustained in road accident. LOSS OF AMENITIES AND LIFE
38. Injured Ramesh Pandey having suffered (i) Fracture of Both Bone Left Leg AND (ii) Bimalleolar Fracture of Left Ankle MACT No. 1377/2017 Ramesh Pandey Vs. Neeraj Khokhar & Ors. Page 16 of 24 has been assessed with 20% (Twenty Percent) permanent disability in relation to Left Lower Limb which is likely to affect his overall health, well-being and quality of life & lifestyle.
39. PW-3 Dr. Vinal Sharma having proved copy of Disability Certificate Ex.PW-3/1 has stated that patient has some difficulty in squatting and walking on slope as a result of fracture & bodily injury sustained in road accident during cross-examination by Ld. counsel for insurance company. Hence, another sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) is awarded to injured towards loss of amenities.
LOSS OF FUTURE INCOME/PROSPECTS
40. PW-3 Dr. Vinal Sharma having produced Original File of Disability Certificate No.F.1(1)/DDU/MB/2019/10323 dated 20.09.2019 has deposed that patient Ramesh Pandey being case of 'Post Traumatic Left Ankle Stiffness' has been assessed with Permanent Disability of 20% in relation to 'Left Lower Limb'.
41. It is well settled law that percentage of loss of earning capacity arising from permanent disability will be different from the percentage of permanent disability and ascertainment of the effect of permanent disability on the actual earning capacity would involve three steps as laid down in para 13 of the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India titled Raj Kumar Vs. Ajay Kumar (Supra).
42. What is required to be assessed by the Tribunal is the effect of the permanent disability on the earning capacity of the injured and after assessing the loss of earning capacity in terms of percentage of the income, it has to be quantified in terms of money to arrive at the future loss of earning by applying the standard multiplier method used to determine the loss of MACT No. 1377/2017 Ramesh Pandey Vs. Neeraj Khokhar & Ors. Page 17 of 24 dependency as held in para 11 of aforesaid judgment titled Raj Kumar Vs. Ajay Kumar (Supra).
43. Considering age, avocation and the fact that injured having suffered (i) Fracture of Both Bone Left Leg AND (ii) Bimalleolar Fracture of Left Ankle has been assessed with permanent physical disability of 20% (Twenty Percent) in relation to Left Lower Limb, this Court is of the view that bodily injury sustained in motor vehicle accident could have resulted in 10% loss of earning capacity.
44. Injured Ramesh Pandey being 35 years 03 months old at the time of accident (as per Aadhar Card & PAN Card mentioning D.O.B 01.08.1982) is entitled to loss of future income by applying multiplier of 16 in addition to future prospect @ 40% upon motional monthly income @ Rs.13,584/- of unskilled worker applicable in Delhi w.e.f. 01.04.2017 as per principles laid down in National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi, (2017) 16 SCC 680.
45. Loss of future income is calculated as - Rs.13,584/- x 140/100 x 16 x 12 x 10/100 = Rs.3,65,137.92/- (Rupees Three Lakhs Sixty Five Thousand One Hundred Thirty Seven & Ninety Two Paise only).
46. Break-up of compensation awarded to injured under pecuniary and non-pecuniary heads is mentioned below in tabulated form:
S. No. HEADS AMOUNT (in
Rupees)
1. Medicines & Treatment Rs.45,172/-
2. Conveyance Rs.10,000/-
3. Special Diet Rs.30,000/-
MACT No. 1377/2017 Ramesh Pandey Vs. Neeraj Khokhar & Ors. Page 18 of 24
4. Attendant Charges Rs.32,000/-
5. Loss of Income Rs.54,336/-
5. Pain & Suffering Rs.50,000/-
6. Loss of amenities of life Rs.50,000/-
7. Mental & Physical Shock Rs.50,000/-
8. Loss of future income/prospect Rs.3,65,137.92/-
TOTAL Rs.6,86,645.92/-
rounded off to
Rs.6,87,000/-
INTEREST
47. There is nothing on record to justify withholding interest on the award amount. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the present case, it will be just and proper to granted interest @ 7.5% per annum on the award amount in terms of judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Mannat Johar & Anr. (2019) 15 SCC 260. Injured Ramesh Pandey is therefore awarded interest @ 7.5% per annum upon award amount Rs.6,87,000/- (Rupees Six Lakhs Eighty Seven Thousand only) from the date of filing of DAR on 28.11.2017 till notice of deposit under Order XXI Rule 1 CPC to petitioner/counsel.
LIABILITY
48. R1/Neeraj Khokhar (driver) being principal tortfeasor driving Hyundai Xcent Car No. HR-12A-6544 in rash and negligent manner and R2/Mukhtyar Singh (owner) being vicariously liable for the act of the driver are jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation along with interest. However, since offending Hyundai Xcent Car No.HR-12A-6544 was insured against Third Party Risk so, R3/Universal Sompo MACT No. 1377/2017 Ramesh Pandey Vs. Neeraj Khokhar & Ors. Page 19 of 24 General Insurance Co. Ltd. being statutorily liable under Section 149 (1) of M. V. Act shall pay the award amount along with interest to injured Ramesh Pandey in the absence of any statutory defence under section 149(2) of M.V. Act.
49. FINDING: Issue No.2 is decided accordingly by holding that R3/Universal Sompo General Insurance Co. Ltd. shall pay the award amount with interest to injured Ramesh Pandey. RELIEF
50. Thus, in view of foregoing discussion & conclusion and having regard to the facts and circumstances of the present case, award for a sum of Rs.6,87,000/- (Rupees Six Lakhs Eighty Seven Thousand only) along with interest @ 7.5% p.a from the date of filing of DAR on 28.11.2017 till notice of deposit under Order XXI Rule 1 CPC is passed in favour of injured and against all respondents.
51. The above-said compensation amount with interest shall be paid to injured by R3/Universal Sompo General Insurance Co. Ltd.
52. FORM-IVB SUMMARY OF THE COMPUTATION OF AWARD AMOUNT IN INJURY CASE TO BE INCORPORATED IN THE AWARD
1. Date of accident : 01.11.2017
2. Name of the injured : Ramesh Pandey
3. Age of the injured : 35 years
4. Occupation of the injured : Private job
5. Income of the injured : Rs.13,584/- minimum wage of unskilled worker w.e.f.
01.04.2017 MACT No. 1377/2017 Ramesh Pandey Vs. Neeraj Khokhar & Ors. Page 20 of 24
6. Nature of injury : Grievous
7. Medical treatment taken : JPN Apex Trauma Centre, by the injured Delhi & Ortho Plus Hospital, Gopal Nagar, Najafgarh
8. Period of hospitalization : 07.11.2017 to 11.11.2017
9. Whether any permanent : Yes disability? If yes, give details.
10. Computation of Compensation S. No. Heads Awarded by the Tribunal
11. Pecuniary Loss:
(i) Expenditure on treatment Rs.45,172/-
(ii) Expenditure on conveyance Rs.10,000/-
(iii) Expenditure on special diet Rs.30,000/-
(iv) Cost of nursing/attendant Rs.32,000/-
(v) Cost of artificial limb -
(vi) Loss of earning capacity 10%
(vii) Loss of income Rs.54,336/-
(viii) 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 Rs.50,000/-
physical shock
(ii) Pain and suffering Rs.50,000/-
(iii) Loss of amenities of life Rs.50,000/-
(iv) Disfiguration -
(v) Loss of marriage prospects -
(vi) Loss of earning, inconvenience, -
hardship, disappointment,
frustration, mental stress,
dejectment and unhappiness in
MACT No. 1377/2017 Ramesh Pandey Vs. Neeraj Khokhar & Ors. Page 21 of 24
future life etc.
13. Disability resulting in loss of earning capacity:
(i) Percentage of disability assessed 20% and nature of disability as permanent or temporary
(ii) Loss of amenities of loss of -
expectation of life span on account of disability
(iii) Percentage of loss of earning 10% capacity in relation to disability
(iv) Loss of future Income - (Income x Rs.3,65,137.92/-
% Earning Capacity x Multiplier)
14. TOTAL COMPENSATION Rs.6,86,645.92/-
rounded off to Rs.6,87,000/-
15. INTEREST AWARDED
16. Interest amount up to the date of @ 7.5% p.a. from award the date of filing of DAR on 28.11.2017 till notice of deposit under Order XXI Rule 1 CPC
17. Total amount including interest Rs.6,87,000/- + interest @ 7.5% p.a. from the date of filing of the DAR on 28.11.2017 till notice of deposit under Order XXI Rule 1 CPC
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 By credit in the award amount to the claimant(s). SB Account of the MACT No. 1377/2017 Ramesh Pandey Vs. Neeraj Khokhar & Ors. Page 22 of 24 injured 21 Next Date for compliance of the 29.05.2025 award.
53. The award amount shall be deposited by R3/Universal Sompo General Insurance Co. Ltd. in Account No.42709452600 of MACT, South West, Dwarka Courts, New Delhi at State Bank of India, District Court Complex, Sector-10, Dwarka, New Delhi (IFSC Code SBIN0011566 and MICR Code 110002483) through RTGS/NEFT/IMPS within 30 days of award as per section 168(3) of M.V. Act under intimation to the Nazir of this court with proof of notice to the claimant/injured and his counsel.
54. Statement of injured Ramesh Pandey regarding financial status, needs and liabilities has been recorded. In view of the said statement and having regard to the facts and circumstances of the present case, the award amount shall be disbursed in following manner:-
S. Name Status Amount of Award Release Amo No Amount unt of FDR
1. Ramesh Injured Rs.6,87,000/- + Rs.6,87,000/- Nil Pandey interest @ 7.5%
- with p.a. from the date proportionate of filing of the interest in DAR on MACT 28.11.2017 till Claims SB notice of deposit Account of under Order XXI injured Rule 1 CPC
55. Injured has mentioned details of SB Account No.38309387849 with SBI Bank, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi (IFSC Code: SBIN0008524) in his statement recorded on 03.03.2025 MACT No. 1377/2017 Ramesh Pandey Vs. Neeraj Khokhar & Ors. Page 23 of 24 and it is requested that cash amount may be transferred in the said SB Account.
56. Accordingly, Manager, State Bank of India, District Courts Complex, Sector-10, Dwarka, New Delhi is directed to transfer Rs.6,87,000/- with proportionate interest in SB Account No.38309387849 with SBI Bank, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi (IFSC Code: SBIN0008524).
57. R3/Universal Sompo General Insurance Co. Ltd. shall inform the petitioner and his counsel regarding award amount being transferred/deposited in MACT Account through registered post.
58. Copy of this award be sent to the Manager, SBI, District Courts Complex, Sector-10, Dwarka, New Delhi and SBI Bank, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi (IFSC Code: SBIN0008524) for information /compliance.
59. Dasti copy of award be given to Ld. Counsel for injured and respondents.
60. Ahlmad is directed to prepare separate miscellaneous file to be listed on 29.05.2025 for filing compliance report.
61. File be consigned to Record Room.
Digitally signed TARUN by TARUN Announced in the open Court YOGESH YOGESH Date: 2025.04.23 on 21.04.2025 17:23:38 +0530 (Tarun Yogesh) PO, MACT-01, Dwarka Courts, New Delhi MACT No. 1377/2017 Ramesh Pandey Vs. Neeraj Khokhar & Ors. Page 24 of 24