Delhi District Court
Surgyan Singh vs . Mam Chand & Ors. on 7 December, 2018
1
IN THE COURT OF SH. PARAMJIT SINGH, PO : MACT (SOUTHWEST
DISTRICT), DWARKA COURTS: NEW DELHI
MACP No. : 1252/16
Surgyan Singh Vs. Mam Chand & Ors.
CNR No.DLSW010011192014
Sh. Surgyan Singh
S/o Sh. Madan Singh
A5/87, Shiv Puri,
Shiv Puri , Mithapur, Badarpur,
New Delhi
Presently Resident of :
H. No. 9, IIIrd Floor, TypeI,
National Law University,
Sector14, Dwarka,
New Delhi ... Petitioner
Vs
1. Sh. Mam Chand
S/o Sh. Lalit Prasad
R/o H169, Harijan Basti,
Palam Extention,
New Delhi45
2. Sh. Kamal Malik
S/o Sh. Karam Singh
R/o RZ686, Z13, Gali No. 6,
Raj Nagar1, Palam Colony,
New Delhi
3. National Insurance Company Ltd.
B18, First Floor, Community Centre
Janak Puri, New Delhi. ... Respondents
MACP No. : 1252/16 Surgyan Singh Vs. Mam Chand & Ors. 1/19
2
Date of institution of the case 19.09.2005
Date on which, earlier award was set aside17.08.2012
Date on which, judgment have been reserved20.11.2018
Date of pronouncement of judgment 07.12.2018
JUDGMENT
The present claim petition u/s 166 & 140 of Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 for grant of compensation has been filed on behalf of petitioners Surgyan Singh against respondents Mam Chand & Kamal Malik.
2. It is pertinent to mention here that the present case was earlier disposed of vide judgment/ award dated 07.10.2010 passed by one of the Ld. Predecessors of this court. Thereafter, on 17.08.2012, JD/ respondents deposited the principal amount and submitted that offending vehicle was fully insured at the time of accident and requested that the earlier award dated 07.10.2010 was liable to be set aside as the same was not sustainable, being passed in the absence of National Insurance Company (insurer). Ld counsel for DH did not oppose the aforesaid submissions and submitted that matter may be decided afresh after impleading National Insurance Company as one of the respondents. Accordingly, award dated 07.10.2010 was set aside with directions to the DH to file amended memo of parties and notice was issued to the above said insurance company vide order dated 17.08.2012 passed by one of the Ld. Predecessors of this court.
3. Brief facts as made out from the petition are that on 21.04.2005 at 9:10 PM, petitioner Surgyan Singh was standing outside of his taxi bearing DL 1 Y 7465 and in the meanwhile, one bus bearing no. DL 1 PA 2987 came in rash and negligent manner and hit his taxi due to which, he sustained muliple injuries all over his body MACP No. : 1252/16 Surgyan Singh Vs. Mam Chand & Ors. 2/19 3 and his vehicle was also got damaged. It is further stated that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of respondent no.1 and after the accident, petitioner/ injured was taken to Safdarjung hospital, where he got treatment for the injuries sustained in the accident and case in this regard was registered vide FIR No. 139/2005 u/s 279/338/427 IPC at PS Delhi Cantt. It is also stated that respondents were jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation and it has been prayed that an award for a sum of Rs.10 lacs may be passed in favour of the petitioner and against the respondents.
4. Written statement has been filed on behalf of R3/National Insurance Company Ltd., wherein it has been stated that present petition was not maintainable as there was no cause of action against the said respondent. It is further stated that driver of the offending vehicle was not holding any valid DL and offending vehicle was not having any permit or fitness at the time of accident. It is also stated that amount of compensation, being claimed by the petitioner, was highly exaggerated, exorbitant, disproportionate and without any basis.
Further, in reply on merits, the contents of paras1 to 10, 14 to 16 and 19 to 21 of the petition have been denied for want of knowledge and the contents of para 11 to 13 are stated to be matter of record. All other averments made in the petition have also been denied on behalf of R3 / insurance company and it has been prayed that the petitioners were not entitled to any compensation from the said respondent.
5. It is pertinent to mention here that WS have not been filed on behalf of R1 Mam Chand (driver) and R2 Kamal Malik ( owner of offending vehicle) in this case.
MACP No. : 1252/16 Surgyan Singh Vs. Mam Chand & Ors. 3/19 4
6. In the present case, from the pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed :
ISSUES :
1. Whether petitioner Surgyan Singh sustained injuries in a motor vehicle accident dated 21.04.2005 due to rash and negligent driving of vehicle no. DL1PA2987, being driven by R1 Mam Chand, owned by R2 Kamal Malik and insured by R3/ National Insurance Company Ltd. ? ...OPP
2. Whether the petitioner is entitled to claim compensation, if so, what amount and from whom ? ...OPP
3. Relief.
7. In support of his case, petitioner/ injured Surgyan Singh has examined himself as PW1 and thereafter PE on behalf of the petitioner .
It is pertinent to mention here that in the instant case, Sh. Babu Lal, LDC, Transport Authority, SouthWest Zone, Palam, Janak Puri has been examined as AW1 and Sh. Naresh Kumar, Driver Licence Office, Dwarka, Sector 10, New Delhi has been examined as CW1, Sh.Jitender Yadav, LDC, License Office, Dwarka, Sector 10, New Delhi has been examined as CW2 & Sh. Ashok Kumar, Motor Licensing Officer, SouthWest ZoneI, Palam/ Dwarka, New Delhi has been examined as CW3 by the Ld Predecessors of this court.
8. In its RE, the insurance company has examined R3W1 Sh. Shyam Singh Bisht, Asstt. National Insurance Company Ltd thereafter, RE on behalf of R3/ insurance company was closed.
9. I have heard arguments put forward by Ld. counsels for the petitioner MACP No. : 1252/16 Surgyan Singh Vs. Mam Chand & Ors. 4/19 5 and respondents and have carefully gone through record of the case. I have carefully considered the evidence led by the petitioner in support of his case and RE led on behalf of R3/ insurance company as well as evidence of the witnesses examined as AW1 and CW1 to CW3 by the Ld. Predecessors of this court. I have also carefully perused written submissions filed on behalf of the petitioner and respondents.
10. The issuewise findings are as under :
11. ISSUE No. 1Whether petitioner Surgyan Singh sustained injuries in a motor vehicle accident dated 21.04.2005 due to rash and negligent driving of vehicle no. DL1PA 2987, being driven by R1 Mam Chand, owned by R2 Kamal Malik and insured by R3/ National Insurance Company Ltd. ? ...OPP The onus to prove this issue was upon the petitioner and in order to discharge the said onus, the petitioner/ injured Surgyan Singh has examined himself as PW1 and has filed his evidence by way of affidavit (Ex. PW1/A), wherein it has been stated that on 21.04.2005 at 9:10 PM, he was standing outside of his taxi bearing DL 1 Y 7465 and in the meanwhile, one bus bearing no. DL 1 PA 2987 came in rash and negligent manner and hit his taxi due to which he sustained multiple injuries all over his body and his vehicle was also got damaged. PW 1 further deposed that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of respondent no. 1 and after the accident, he was taken to Safdarjung hospital, where he got treatment for the injuries sustained in the accident and case in this regard was registered vide FIR No. 139/2005 u/s 279/338/427 IPC at PS Delhi Cantt.
The important fact is that this witness i.e. PW1 ( petitioner/ injured) was cross examined on behalf of the respondents, but nothing material has come on MACP No. : 1252/16 Surgyan Singh Vs. Mam Chand & Ors. 5/19 6 record which could assail the credibility on trustworthiness of this witness.
In his cross examination by the Ld. counsel for R2, PW1 denied the suggestion that accident took place due to his own negligence or that driver of offending vehicle was not driving the vehicle in rash and negligent manner. PW also denied the suggestion that he had received no injury in the accident or that he was deposing falsely. Further, in his cross examination by Ld counsel for R3/ insurance company, PW1 denied the suggestion that insurance company has been wrongly implicated. In these circumstances, nothing material has come on record which could shake the credibility of this witness qua his deposition regarding the manner in which the accident was caused in this case.
Hence, in view of the above discussion & observations and having regard to the fact and circumstances of the present case, it is evident that petitioner/injured Surgyan Singh sustained injuries in motor vehicle accident due to rash and negligent driving of offending vehicle no. DL 1 PA 2987, which was being driven by R1 Mamchand, owned by R2 Kamal Malik and insured with R3/ National Insurance Company Ltd at the time of accident.
Accordingly, issue no.1 is decided in favour of the petitioner and against the respondents.
12. ISSUE No.2 "Whether the petitioner is entitled to claim compensation, if so, what amount and from whom ? ...OPP"
The onus to prove this issue was upon the petitioner/ injured and in order to discharge the said onus, the petitioner/ injured Surgyan Singh has examined himself as PW1 and has filed his affidavit (Ex. PW1/A), wherein it has been stated that he sustained injuries due to rash and negligent driving of offending vehicle DL 1 MACP No. : 1252/16 Surgyan Singh Vs. Mam Chand & Ors. 6/19 7 PA 2987, which was being driven by R1 Mamchand and after the accident, he was taken to Safdarjung hospital, where he got treatment for the injuries sustained in the accident and case in this regard was registered vide FIR No. 139/2005 u/s 279/338/427 IPC at PS Delhi Cantt. PW1 further deposed that at the time of accident, he was working as a driver and was earning Rs.4,500/p.m. PW1 deposed that he had spent Rs.1 lac on his medical treatment Rs.50,000/ on special diet and Rs.30,000/ on conveyance charges. PW1 further deposed that accident took place due to rash and negligent driving of respondent no. 1, who was driving the offending vehicle, which was owned by respondent no. 2. PW1 has also relied upon the documents i.e. Ex. PW1/1 to Ex. PW1/90.
In the present case, from the material and evidence record, it is clear that petitioner Surgyan Singh has sustained injuries on account of rash and negligent driving of offending vehicle bearing no. DL 1 PA 2987 which was being driven by R1 Mamchand, owned by R2 Kamal Malik and insured with R3/National Insurance Company Ltd at the time of accident and as such, the petitioner/injured Surgyan Singh has become entitled to claim compensation for the injuries caused to him in the abovesaid accident.
Quantum of compensation payable to the petitioner/injuredSurgyan Singh is ascertained under the following heads :
13. NATURE AND EXTENT OF INJURIES As per the medical treatment record/discharge summary pertaining to Safdarjung Hospital, New Delhi, petitioner/injured Surgyan Singh is a case of fracture right thigh bone.
Further the perusal of the record reveals that petitioner/injured has not filed on record any document to show that he has suffered any permanent disability MACP No. : 1252/16 Surgyan Singh Vs. Mam Chand & Ors. 7/19 8 due to the injuries sustained by him in the accident in this case.
14. MEDICINES & TREATMENT In the present case, as per record, the petitioner/injured Surgyan Singh has undergone treatment at Safdarjung Hospital ,New Delhi , where he got treatment for the injuries sustained by him in the accident in this case .
Further, in regard to the abovesaid treatment undergone by him, petitioner/injured Surgyan Singh has placed on record the medical bills/ receipts, amounting to Rs. 14,000/ ( Ex. PW1/29 to Ex. PW1/86). There is no reason to doubt the said bills/receipts. In these circumstances and in view of the material on record, the petitioner/injured is entitled to a sum of Rs. 14,000/ and accordingly , the petitioner/ injured Surgyan Singh is awarded the said amount i.e Rs. 14,000/ (Rupees Fourteen Thousand Only ) towards medicines and medical treatment.
15. CONVEYANCE & SPECIAL DIET In the present case, as per the medical treatment record, petitioner/ injured Surgyan Singh is a case of fracture right thigh bone. In these circumstances, the petitioner/injured must have visited the hospital/doctors for his treatment and would also have required special diet for certain period to recover from the injuries sustained in the accident.
It is being submitted on behalf of the petitioner/injured that he has spent Rs. 30,000/ on conveyance and Rs. 50,000/ on special diet, however no evidence, documentary or otherwise, in this regard has been brought on record on behalf of the petitioner. Further, it is pertinent to note that from the material on record, it is evident that the petitioner/injured has not suffered any permanent disability due to the injuries sustained in the accident in this case.
MACP No. : 1252/16 Surgyan Singh Vs. Mam Chand & Ors. 8/19 9 Hence, in view of the above and in view of the material on record, petitioner/injured is entitled to a sum of Rs. 15,000/ ( Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) towards conveyance. Further, in view of the injuries suffered by him, the petitioner/ injured must have needed special diet for a certain period to have a fast and proper recovery. In these circumstances and in view of the material on record, the petitioner/injured is also awarded Rs. 20,000/ (Rupees Twenty Thousand Only) towards expenses for special diet.
16. LOSS OF INCOME In the present case, the petitioner/injured stated that he was working as a driver and was earning Rs. 4,500/ p.m at the time of accident, however, no documentary evidence in this regard has been placed on record and in the absence thereof, the minimum wages during the relevant period (21.4.2005) i.e Rs.3044.90/p.m rounded of as Rs. 3045/ p.m is taken as criteria for calculating the loss of income to the petitioner/injured.
In the instant case, petitioner/injured has suffered fracture right thigh bone and has remained hospitalized for about thirteen days. Further, in view of the material on record, it appears that it might have taken about three months for the petitioner/injured to recover from the said injuries sustained by him in the accident. In these circumstances and in view of the material on record, the petitioner is entitled to a sum of Rs. 3045/ x 3= Rs. 9,135/ (Rupees Nine Thousand One Hundred Thirty Five only) under the head ' Loss of Income'.
17. ATTENDANT CHARGES In the present case, the petitioner/injured has deposed that he has spent a sum of Rs. 72,000/ on attendant , however neither the said attendant has been MACP No. : 1252/16 Surgyan Singh Vs. Mam Chand & Ors. 9/19 10 examined nor any documentary proof regarding the payment being made to the abovesaid attendant have been brought on record by the petitioner/ injured in this case.
In the instant case, the perusal of the record reveals that petitioner / injured Surgyan Singh is a case of fracture right thigh bone and he remained hospitalized for about thirteen days due to the said injuries sustained by him in the accident. In these circumstances, the petitioner/ injured must have required the services of attendant for about three months. It is pertinent to note that the petitioner/ injured would have also needed an attendant to look after him, even if the gratuitous services were rendered by the some or the other of this family members. In the case titled as "Delhi Transport Corporation and Anr. V. Lalita" (reported as AIR 1981 Delhi 558), it has been held by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi that a victim cannot be deprived of compensation towards gratuitous services rendered by some of the family members.
In these circumstances and in view of the material on record, the petitioner/injured shall be entitled to an amount of Rs. 4,000 X 3 = Rs. 12,000/ (Rupees Twelve Thousand Only) towards 'Attendant Charges'.
18. PAIN & SUFFERINGS As per the settled law, for assessing the pain & sufferings, the following factors have to be taken into account :
(a) Nature of injury
(b) Parts of body where injuries occurred
(c) Surgeries, if any
(d) Confinement in hospital
(e) Duration of the treatment.
In the instant case, in view of the material/evidence on record, there is MACP No. : 1252/16 Surgyan Singh Vs. Mam Chand & Ors. 10/19 11 no element of doubt that the petitioner/injured has suffered fracture right thigh bone and has remained hospitalized for about thirteen days due to the said injuries sustained by him. In these circumstances and in view of the law laid down in the case titled as "Rekha Jain Vs. National Insurance Co. Ltd." (arising out of SLP (C) Nos. 564951 of 2012), the petitioner/injured is entitled to compensation on account of pain & suffering due to the accident. The pain and sufferings of petitioner/injured can not be adequately compensated in terms of money however, in view of the facts & circumstances of the present case and in view of the material on record, a sum of Rs.50,000/ ( Rupees Fifty Thousand only) is awarded to the petitioner/injured towards the head " pain & sufferings".
19. LOSS OF ENJOYMENT OF LIFE AND AMENITIES The petitioner/injured has claimed that he has suffered the enjoyment of life and other amenities on account of the accident. The petitioner/injured was about 24 years of age at the time of accident and has suffered fracture right thigh bone and was hospitalized for about thirteen days due to the said injuries sustained in the accident. In these circumstances and in view of the law laid down vide judgment of Rekha Jain (Supra), the petitioner/injured shall be entitled to a sum of Rs. 30,000/ (Rupees Thirty Thousand only) as compensation towards loss of enjoyment of life and amenities. In addition to this, the petitioner/ injured shall also be entitled to a sum of Rs. 20,000/ (Rupees Twenty Thousand only) as compensation for mental and physical shock suffered by him due to the accident in this case.
20. The breakup of compensation that has been awarded to the petitioner/ injuredSurgyan Singh is tabulated as below : MACP No. : 1252/16 Surgyan Singh Vs. Mam Chand & Ors. 11/19 12 S.No. HEADS AMOUNT (in Rupees) 1 Medicines & Treatment Rs. 14,000/
2. Conveyance Rs. 15,000/
3. Special Diet Rs. 20,000/
4. Loss of Income Rs. 9,135/
5. Attendant Rs. 12,000/
6. Pain & Sufferings Rs. 50,000/
7. Loss of Enjoyment of Life and Amenities Rs. 30,000/
8. Compensation for mental and physical shock Rs. 20,000/ Total Rs. 1,70,135/ rounded of to Rs. 1,70,500/
21. INTEREST In the instant case, there is nothing on record, which could justify the withholding of interest on the award amount. In these circumstances and having regard to the fact and circumstances of the present case, it will be just and proper to award interest @ 9% per annum on the award amount in this case. Hence, the petitioner is awarded interest @ 9% per annum on the abovesaid compensation/ award amount i.e Rs. 1,70,500/ from the date of filing of petition i.e. 19.9.2005 till realization.
22. LIABILITY The offending vehicle was being driven by respondent no.1 Mam Chand, owned by respondent No.2Kamal Malik and was insured with respondent no.3/ National Insurance Company Ltd at the time of accident and as such, MACP No. : 1252/16 Surgyan Singh Vs. Mam Chand & Ors. 12/19 13 respondent no. 3/National l Insurance Company Ltd being the 'principal tort feasor', shall be liable to pay the awarded amount to the petitioner/injured .
It is being submitted on behalf of R3/Insurance company that it was entitled to recovery rights against R1 & R2 as R1 Mam Chand was not having valid driving licence and the insurance policy qua the offending vehicle was also not valid at the time of accident . In this regard, R3/Insurance company has examined R3W1 Shyam Singh Bisht, Assistant, National Insurance Company Ltd, who has filed his evidence by way of affidavit (Ex.R3W1/A).
In view of the above, it is being submitted on behalf of R3/Insurance company that it was entitled to the recovery rights against R1 & R2 as R1/ driver of offending vehicle no. DL 1PA2987 was not holding valid driving license and the insurance policy qua the offending vehicle was also not valid, however the said submissions made on behalf of R3/Insurance company are devoid of any merits and contrary to the record as the perusal of the record reveals that the insurance policy qua the offending vehicle was valid on the day of accident . Further, in regard to the driving license of R1 Mam Chand , it has been stated by CW3 Sh Ashok Kumar , Motor Licensing Officer, South West Zone1 , Palam/Dwarka, New Delhi that as per their record , Sh. Mam Chand was having valid driving license to drive heavy transport vehicle (HTV) on 21.4.2005 vide Ex. CW3/1. He also stated that as per their record, the said license was issued on 18.2.1999 and it was renewed on 07.8.2004 and was valid up to 06.8.2007 .
Thus, in view of the above discussion & observations and in view of the material on record, the R3/Insurance company shall not be entitled to recovery rights against R1 Mam Chand (driver ) and R2 Kamal Malik ( owner of offending vehicle) in the fact and circumstances of the present case and accordingly, respondent no. 3/ National Insurance Company Ltd., shall only be liable to pay the award MACP No. : 1252/16 Surgyan Singh Vs. Mam Chand & Ors. 13/19 14 amount to the petitioner/injured herein.
Hence, in view of the above, Issue No. 2 is decided accordingly.
23. RELIEF Thus in view of the above discussion & observations and having regard to the fact and circumstances of the present case, an award for a sum of Rs. 1,70,500 / (Rupees One Lakh, Seven Thousand & Five Hundred only) alongwith interest @ 9% p.a from the date of filing of the petition i.e 19.9.2005 till realization is passed in favour of the petitioner/injured-Surgyan Singh . The abovesaid compensation amount shall be payable by the respondent no.3/ National Insurance Company Ltd to the petitioner/injured.
24. FORMIVB SUMMARY OF THE COMPUTATION OF AWARD AMOUNT IN INJURY CASES TO BE INCORPORATED IN THE AWARD
i) Date of accident : 2.1.4.2005
ii). Name of the injured : Sh. Surgyan Singh
iii). Age of the injured : 24 years ( at the time of accident)
iv). Occupation of the injured : Driver (at the time of accident)
v). Income of the injured : Rs. 3,045/ p.m
vi). Nature of injury : Grievous
vii). Medical treatment taken : Safdarjung Hospital,New Delhi by the injured
viii). Period of hospitalization : About thirteen days
ix). Whether any permanent : No disability?If yes, give details MACP No. : 1252/16 Surgyan Singh Vs. Mam Chand & Ors. 14/19 15
10. Computation of Compensation S. No. Heads Awarded by the Tribunal
11. Pecuniary Loss:
(i) Expenditure on treatment Rs. 14,000/
(ii) Expenditure on conveyance Rs. 15,000/
(iii) Expenditure on special diet Rs. 20,000/
(iv) Cost of attendant Rs. 12,000/
(v) Loss of earning capacity
(vi) Loss of income Rs. 9,135/
(vii) Any other loss which may require any
special treatment or aid to the injured for
the rest of his life
12. Non Pecuniary Loss:
(i) Compensation for mental and physical Rs. 20,000/
shock
(ii) Pain and suffering Rs. 50,000/
(iii) Loss of amenities of life Rs. 30,000/
(iv) Disfiguration
(v) Loss of marriage prospects
(vi) Loss of earning, inconvenience, hardships,
disappointment, frustration, mental stress
dejectment and unhappiness in future life
etc.,
13. Disability resulting in loss of earning capacity
(i) Percentage of disability assessed and nature N.A of disability as permanent or temporary
(ii) Loss of amenities or loss of expectation of life span on account of disability
(iii) Percentage of loss of earning capacity in relation to disability MACP No. : 1252/16 Surgyan Singh Vs. Mam Chand & Ors. 15/19 16
(iv) Loss of future income(Income x % Earning Capacity x Multiplier)
14. Total Compensation Rs. 1,70,135/ rounded of to Rs. 1,70,500/
15. INTEREST AWARDED
16. Interest amount up to the date of award @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of petition i.e. 19.9.2005 till realization.
17. Total amount including interest Rs. 1,70,500/ + interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the petition i.e. 19.92005 till realization.
18. Award amount released As per table given below
19. Award amount kept in FDRs As per table given below
20. Mode of disbursement of the award By credit in the SB Account of amount to the claimant(s) (Clause29) the petitioner/injured. 21 Next Date for compliance of the award. 11.1.2019 ( Clause 31)
25. In the instant case, the award amount shall be deposited /transferred by respondent no. 3/ National Insurance Company Ltd in the Account No. 37665510911 of 'MACT (SouthWest), Dwarka Courts, New Delhi ' at State Bank of India, District Court Complex, Sector10, Dwarka New Delhi, (IFSC Code SBIN0011566 and MICR Code 110002483) by RTGS/NEFT/IMPS under intimation, with proof of notice to the claimant/petitioner and his counsel, to the Nazir of this court .
Further,the statement of petitioner/injuredSurgyan Singh regarding his financial status, needs and liabilities have also been recorded in this case . In view MACP No. : 1252/16 Surgyan Singh Vs. Mam Chand & Ors. 16/19 17 of the said statement of the petitioner/injured and having regard to facts and circumstances of the present case , the award amount shall be distributed as follows: S.No. Name Status Amount of Release Amount of Period of Award Amount in Rs. FDR FDR
1. Surgyan Singh Injured Rs. 1,70,500 / Rs. 20,500/ Rs. 30,000/ 1 year Rs. 30,000/ 2 years Rs. 30,000/ 3 years Rs. 30,000/ 4 years Rs. 30,000/ 5 years
26. Petitioner/injured Surgyan Singh has produced the passbook of his SB Account No. 47700100009555 at Bank of Baroda, Sector17, Dwarka, New Delhi, wherein it has been endorsed that " No Cheque Book & ATM issued".
It is being requested on behalf of the petitioner/injured that the above said cash amount may be transferred to his aforesaid SB Account at Bank of Baroda, Sector17, Dwarka, New Delhi.
Accordingly, the Manager, State Bank of India, District Courts Complex, Sector10, Dwarka, New Delhi is directed to transfer the abovesaid cash amount to the abovesaid SB Account No. 47700100009555 of petitioner/injured Surgyan Singh at Bank of Baroda, Sector17, Dwarka, New Delhi and to keep the remaining amount in the form of above mentioned FDRs.
Manager, Bank of Baroda, Sector17, Dwarka, New Delhi is directed to release the abovesaid cash amount to petitioner/injured Surgyan Singh, as per MACP No. : 1252/16 Surgyan Singh Vs. Mam Chand & Ors. 17/19 18 rules, as prayed.
At the time of maturity, the fixed deposit amount shall be credited in the aforesaid savings bank account of petitioner/injured.
All the original FDRs shall be retained by the concerned bank, however, the statement containing FDR number, amount, date of maturity and maturity amount shall be provided to petitioner/injured Surgyan Singh .
Manager of the concerned bank is directed not to permit premature encashment or loan qua the abovesaid FDRs to the petitioner/injured Surgyan Singh without the prior permission of this court.
Further, the interest on the said FDRs shall be paid monthly by automatic credit /transfer of interest amount in the aforesaid SB Account of the petitioner/injured Surgyan Singh .
The abovesaid Bank of Baroda, Sector17, Dwarka, New Delhi is also directed not to issue any cheque book and/or debit card to the petitioner/ injured - Surgyan Singh and if the same have already been issued, the said bank is directed to cancel the same and make an endorsement on the pass book that no cheque book or debit card shall be issued to petitioner/injured Surgyan Singh .
Bank of Baroda, Sector17, Dwarka, New Delhi shall permit account holder i.e petitioner/injured Surgyan Singh to withdraw money from his above said saving bank account by means of a withdrawal form .
27. The insurance company shall inform the petitioner/injured as well as his counsel through registered post that the award amount is being transferred/ deposited so as to facilitate the petitioner/injured to know about the deposit in the account.
Copy of this award be sent to the concerned Manager, SBI, District MACP No. : 1252/16 Surgyan Singh Vs. Mam Chand & Ors. 18/19 19 Courts Complex,Sector10, Dwarka, New Delhi and Manager,Bank of Baroda, Sector17, Dwarka, New Delhi, for information / compliance.
Copy of this award be also given ''Dasti' to the petitionerinjured/ his counsel and Ld. Counsel for the respondent/insurance company.
Ahlmad is directed to prepare a separate misc. file and put up the same for filing of the compliance report on 11.1.2019.
File be consigned to the record room.
(Announced in the open (Paramjit Singh)
Court on 07.12.2018) PO, MACT (SouthWest District)
Dwarka Courts, New Delhi
07.12.2018
Digitally
signed by
PARAMJIT
PARAMJIT SINGH
SINGH Date:
2018.12.07
15:32:13
+0530
MACP No. : 1252/16 Surgyan Singh Vs. Mam Chand & Ors. 19/19