Delhi District Court
Jagjit Kaur & Anr. vs . Bhagwan Dass & Anr. on 3 May, 2019
1
IN THE COURT OF SH. PARAMJIT SINGH, PO : MACT (SOUTHWEST
DISTRICT), DWARKA COURTS: NEW DELHI
MACP No. : 1493/16
Jagjit Kaur & Anr. Vs. Bhagwan Dass & Anr.
CNR No.DLSW010003272012
1. Jagjit Kaur
W/o Sh. Pyara Singh Chahal
2. Pyara Singh Chahal
S/o Sh. Kaka Singh Chahal
Both Residents of :
H. No. 259, Lane No. 6,
Jujhar Nagar,
Patiala, Punjab ... Petitioners
Vs
1. Bhagwan Dass (DrivercumOwner)
S/o Shahir Singh
R/o H1920, Gali Ravi Das,
DDA Flats, Kali Masjid,
Delhi
2. IFFCO Tokio General Insurance Company Ltd. (Owner)
601604, 6th Floor, Ansal Imperial Tower,
CBlock, Community Centre,
Naraina Vihar,
New Delhi ... Respondents
(MACP No. 1493/16 & 1394/16) Jagjit Kaur & Om Prakash Vs. Bhagwan Dass & Anr. 1/32
2
MACP No. : 1394/16
Om Prakash Vs. Bhagwan Dass & Anr.
CNR No.DLSW010003642013
Om Prakash
S/o Sh. Mange Ram
R/o Village Dadawas,
Tehsil Pataudi, District Gurugram,
Haryana ... Petitioner
Vs
1. Bhagwan Dass (DrivercumOwner)
R/o H1920, Gali Ravi Das,
DDA Flats, Kali Masjid,
Delhi
2. IFFCO Tokio General Insurance Company Ltd. (Owner)
601604, 6th Floor, Ansal Imperial Tower,
CBlock, Community Centre,
Naraina Vihar,
New Delhi ... Respondents
Date of institution of MACP No. 1493/16 23.01.2012
Date of institution of MACP No. 1394/16 18.02.2013
Date on which, judgment have been reserved 08.04.2019
Date of pronouncement of judgment - 03.05.2019
JUDGMENT:
Vide this common judgment, I shall dispose of two petitions bearing MACP No. 1493/16 and MACP No. 1394/16 arising out of the same accident. which took place on 26.11.2011.
The first claim petition bearing (MACP No. 1493/16) has been filed on behalf of petitionersJagjit Kaur & Pyara Singh Chahal against respondent Bhagwan (MACP No. 1493/16 & 1394/16) Jagjit Kaur & Om Prakash Vs. Bhagwan Dass & Anr. 2/32 3 Dass & Anr. for grant of compensation in respect of death of their son Sukhinderjit Singh caused in the accident on 26.11.2011.
The connected claim petition bearing (MACP No. 1394/16) has been filed on behalf of petitioner/injured Om Prakash against respondents Bhagwan Dass & Anr. for grant of compensation qua the injuries sustained by him in the same road accident.
2. Brief facts as made out from the abovesaid petitions are that on 26.11.2011 at about 3:00 PM, Sukhinderjit Singh (since deceased) alongwith Om Prakash was going on a motorcycle and when they reached at road leading from Dhaula Kuan to Gurgaon side, ahead 200 mtrs from foot over bridge, Delhi Cantt, a vehicle bearing no. DL 1T 2249, which was going ahead of the motorcycle and was being driven by its driver rashly and negligently, suddenly applied emergency brakes as a result of which, the motorcycle struck with the taxi and in the accident, Om Prakash was grievously injured and Sukhinderjit Singh Chahal died due to the injuries received in the accident. It is further stated that accident took place due to rash and negligent driving on the part of respondent no. 1 and case in this regard was registered vide FIR No. 254/11 u/s 279/337/304A IPC at PS: Delhi Cantt. It is further stated that deceased Sukhinderjit Singh was aged about 37 years at the time of accident and was earning Rs.6.25 lacs per annum and he used to contribute his entire income to the petitioners. It is stated that petitioner/ injured has spent Rs.50,000/ on his treatment and he has also incurred expenses of Rs.25,000/each on conveyance and special diet. It is also stated that accident took place due to sole rash and negligent driving of respondent no. 1 and it has been prayed in petition bearing MACP no. 1493/16 that an award for a sum of Rs.80 lacs alongwith interest @ 18% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till realization may be passed in (MACP No. 1493/16 & 1394/16) Jagjit Kaur & Om Prakash Vs. Bhagwan Dass & Anr. 3/32 4 favour of the petitioners and against the respondents. Further, in the petition bearing MACP no. 1394/16, it has been prayed that an award for a sum of Rs.10 lacs alongwith interest @ 18% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till realization may be passed in favour of the petitioner/ injured and against the respondents.
3. WS has been filed on behalf of R1 Bhagwan Dass ( drivercumowner of the offending vehicle) and therein it has been stated that there was no cause of action for filing the petition as the alleged accident has occurred due to rash and negligent driving of deceased Sukhinderjit Singh, who was driving the motorcycle in rash and negligent manner. It is further stated that at the time of accident, the front left side tyre of the vehicle got punctured and it was standing stationary/ parked at the extreme left side of the road and it was the deceased, who hit the said vehicle from behind due to his rash and negligent driving. It is stated that the compensation, being claimed by the petitioners was highly excessive and exorbitant. It is also stated that respondent no. 1 was holding a valid DL and the alleged accident has not occurred due to his negligence.
Further, in reply on merits, contents of para 1 to 3 and 8, 10, 14 to 18, 20 to 22, 24 to 26 of the petition are stated to be matter of record. Contents of remaining paras have been denied on behalf of R1 and it has been prayed that the present petitions filed on behalf of the petitioners may be dismissed.
4. WS to the present claim petition has also been filed on behalf of R2/ IFFCO Tokio General Insurance Company Ltd., wherein it has been stated that the petition does not disclose any cause of action against the said respondent.
Further, in reply on merits, contents of para 1 to 17 and 27 of the petition (MACP No. 1493/16 & 1394/16) Jagjit Kaur & Om Prakash Vs. Bhagwan Dass & Anr. 4/32 5 have been denied for want of knowledge. Further in reply to para 18, it has been stated that the vehicle bearing no. DL 1T 2249 was insured with the respondent/ insurance company vide policy/ cover note no. 720169050 for the period from 31.03.2011 to 30.03.2012 in the name of Sh. Bhagwan Dass, subject to term and conditions of the insurance policy. Contents of remaining para have been denied on behalf of R1 and it has been prayed that the present petitions filed on behalf of the petitioners may be dismissed.
5. In the case bearing MACP No.1493/16, on the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed on 09.07.2012 passed by one of the Ld.Predecessors of this court.
ISSUES :
1. Whether Sh. Sukhinderjit Singh Chahal sustained injuries in a motor vehicle accident dated 26.11.2011 due to rash or negligent driving of vehicle no. DL 1T 2249 by R1 ...OPP
2. Whether the petitioners are entitled to claim compensation, if so, what amount and from whom ? ...OPP
3. Relief.
6. In the connected petition bearing MACP No. 1394/16, on the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed on 27.05.2013 passed by one of the Ld. Predecessors of this court.
ISSUES :
1. Whether Sh. Om Prakash sustained injuries in a motor vehicle accident dated 26.11.2011 due to rash and negligent driving of vehicle no. DL 1T 2249 by R1 ? ...OPP (MACP No. 1493/16 & 1394/16) Jagjit Kaur & Om Prakash Vs. Bhagwan Dass & Anr. 5/32 6
2. Whether the petitioner is entitled to claim compensation, if so, what amount and from whom ? ...OPP
3. Relief.
7. In the case bearing MACP No. 1493/16, petitioners have examined petitioner no. 1 Jagjit Kaur as PW1 and they have also examined PW2 Om Prakash and PW3 Santosh Kumar Shukla, Manager Accounts and Finance, ebusinessware Pvt. Ltd. Gurgaon, Haryana and thereafter, PE was closed on behalf of the petitioners/ injured.
In the case bearing, MACP No. 1394/16, the petitioner/ injured Om Prakash has examined himself as PW1 and thereafter, PE was closed on behalf of the petitioners/ injured.
8. In RE, R2/ insurance company has examined R3W1 SI Sanjay Panghal and thereafter Ld counsel for the respondents submitted that no further was to be led and accordingly, RE was closed vide order 22.08.2016 passed by Ld Predecessor of this court.
9. I have heard the arguments put forward by Ld. counsels for the petitioners and respondents and have carefully gone through record of the case. I have carefully considered the evidence led by the petitioners in support of their case and RE led on behalf of R2/insurance company. I have also carefully perused written submissions filed on behalf of the petitioners and respondents.
10. The issuewise findings are as under :
(MACP No. 1493/16 & 1394/16) Jagjit Kaur & Om Prakash Vs. Bhagwan Dass & Anr. 6/32 7
11. ISSUE No. 1 in MACP No. 1493/16 Whether Sh. Sukhinderjit Singh Chahal sustained injuries in a motor vehicle accident dated 26.11.2011 due to rash or negligent driving of vehicle no. DL 1T 2249 by R1 ...OPP AND ISSUE No. 1 in MACP No. 1394/16 Whether Sh. Om Prakash sustained injuries in a motor vehicle accident dated 26.11.2011 due to rash and negligent driving of vehicle no. DL 1T 2249 by R1 ? ...OPP The onus to prove the abovesaid issue no. 1 in both the cases bearing MACP NO. 1493/16 & MACP No. 1394/16 was upon the petitioners therein and in order to discharge the said onus , the petitioners have examined PW Om Prakash ( PW2 in MACP No. 1493/16 and PW1 in MACP No. 1394/16), who has filed his evidence by way of affidavits (Ex. PW2/A in MACP No. 1493/16 and Ex. PW1/A in MACP No. 1394/16 ), wherein it has been stated that on 26.11.2011 at about 3:00 PM, he alongwith Sukhinderjit Singh was going on motorcycle towards Airport. PW Om Prakash further deposed that motorcycle was being driven by Sukhinderjit Singh Chahal and he was sitting on pillion seat and when they reached at road leading from Dhaula Kuan to Gurgaon side, ahead 200 mtrs from foot over bridge, Delhi Cantt, a taxi bearing no. DL 1T 2249, which was going ahead of their motorcycle and was being driven by its driver most rashly and negligently and the driver of the said taxi suddenly applied emergency brakes as a result of which, their motorcycle struck with the taxi and in the accident, he was grievously injured and Sukhinderjit Singh Chahal died due to the injuries received in the accident. PW - Om Prakash also deposed that accident took place due to rash and negligent driving on the part of respondent no. 1, who was at a very fast speed and suddenly applied brakes without (MACP No. 1493/16 & 1394/16) Jagjit Kaur & Om Prakash Vs. Bhagwan Dass & Anr. 7/32 8 any indication and without giving any chance to the motorcycle to stop.
The important fact is that the abovesaid witnesses i.e. PW Om Prakash was cross examined by Ld counsels for respondents, but nothing material has come on record which could assail the credibility or trustworthiness of this witness.
In his cross examination by the Ld. counsel for the respondents, PW Om Prakash stated that he was pillion rider on the motorcycle at the time of accident and he was not wearing helmet at that time, however driver was wearing the same. PW Om Prakash further stated that motorcycle had hit the offending vehicle from behind as the driver of the offending vehicle applied brakes all of a sudden. PW Om Prakash denied the suggestion that motorcyclist had hit the stationary vehicle or that motorcycle was being driven at a fast speed. PW Om Prakash further denied the suggestion that accident occurred due to negligent driving of the motorcyclist. PW Om Prakash also denied the suggestion that he was deposing falsely at the instance of the petitioners.
Further, in regard to abovesaid issue no.1, R2/ insurance company has also examined R3W1 SI Sanjay Panghal, who deposed that he was the 3rd IO of the case and charge sheet and DAR were filed by him. He further stated that site plan already Ex. PW1/5 was prepared by 1st IO ASI Suresh Chand and was handed over to him by the 2nd IO SI Ram Kishan. R3W1 deposed that he has also gone to the spot of accident and there was no infirmity in the site plan and that from inspection of the vehicle, he could gather that motorcycle of the victim had hit the offending vehicle from backside, however the testimony of this witness i.e. R3W1 is not of much use to the respondents in the instant case as admittedly R3W1 was not an eye witness to the accident and he has not deposed anything about the manner in which the accident took place. In fact, in his cross examination by Ld counsel for the petitioners, R3W1 has specifically stated that he was not the person, who had visited the place at the (MACP No. 1493/16 & 1394/16) Jagjit Kaur & Om Prakash Vs. Bhagwan Dass & Anr. 8/32 9 time of accident or seen the accident taking place on that day.
Hence, in view of the above discussion & observations and having regard to the fact and circumstances of the present case, it is evident that deceased Sukhinderjit Singh Chahal received fatal injuries and died and petitioner/ injured Om Prakash sustained injuries in motor vehicle accident due to rash and negligent driving of offending vehicle no. DL 1T 2249, which was being driven and owned by R1 Bhagwan Dass and insured with R2/IFFCO Tokio General Insurance Company Ltd at the time of accident.
Accordingly, issue no.1 is decided in favour of the petitioners and against the respondents.
12. ISSUE No. 2Whether the petitioners are entitled to claim compensation, if so, what amount and from whom ? ...OPP The onus to prove the abovesaid issue no. 2 in MACP No. 1493/16 was upon the petitioners therein and in order to discharge the said onus, petitioners no. 1 Jagjit Kaur has examined herself as PW1 and has filed her evidence by way of affidavit (Ex. PW1/A), wherein it has been stated that deceased Sukhinderjit Singh Chahal was her son and was aged about 37 years at the time of accident. PW1 further deposed that her son met with an accident on 26.11.2011 with vehicle bearing no. DL 1T 2249 and died leaving behind her and her husband Pyara Singh Chahal as the only legal heirs. PW1 deposed that at the time of accident, her son was doing service in ebusinessware India Pvt. Ltd. Gurgaon and was earning Rs.6.25 lacs per annum and was contributing his entire income for household expenses. PW1 has also relied upon the documents, Ex. PW1/ 1 to Ex. PW1/9.
(MACP No. 1493/16 & 1394/16) Jagjit Kaur & Om Prakash Vs. Bhagwan Dass & Anr. 9/32 10 Hence, in view of the above and in view of the material and evidence record, it is clear that deceased Sukhinderjit Singh Chahal sustained fatal injuries and died in a motor vehicle accident dated 26.11.2011 due to rash or negligent driving of vehicle no. DL 1T 2249, which was being driven and owned by R1 Bhagwan Dass and insured with R2/IFFCO Tokio Insurance Company Ltd. at the time of accident and as such petitioners, being the LRs of the deceased Sukhinderjit Singh Chahal have become entitled to claim compensation for the death of said deceased in the abovesaid accident.
Quantum of compensation payable to the petitioners/LRs of deceased Sukhinderjit Singh is ascertained under the following heads:
13. AGE & MULTIPLIER As per his driving license ( Ex. PW1/2) and other documents/material on record, the date of birth of the deceased Sukhinderjit Singh was 29.7.1973 and as such, he was about 38 years of age at the time of accident on 26.11.2011. Hence, the multiplier of '15' is taken in this case.
14. LOSS OF DEPENDENCY In the present case, in view of the material/evidence on record, it is evident that at the time of accident, deceased Sukhinderjit Singh was unmarried and has left behind two LRs i.e. Smt. Jagjit Kaur ( mother ) and Sh. Pyara Singh Chahal ( father ). In these circumstances, in view of the law/guidelines laid down in the case titled as 'Sarla Verma & Ors. Vs. DTC & Anr' [ reported as (2009 )6SCC 121] , 50% of the income of the deceased is liable to be deducted from his total income towards personal and living expenses of the deceased.
In view of the above and in view of the material on record, the annual (MACP No. 1493/16 & 1394/16) Jagjit Kaur & Om Prakash Vs. Bhagwan Dass & Anr. 10/32 11 contribution of the deceased to the family multiplied by a multiplier as per above guidelines shall give the loss of dependency to the entire family.
In the instant case, it is being submitted on behalf of the petitioners that at the time of accident, deceased - Sh. Sukhinderjit Singh was doing service in ebusinessware India Pvt. Ltd. Gurgaon and was earning Rs.6.25 lacs per annum. In this regard, petitioners have also examined PW3 Santosh Kumar Shukla, Manager Accounts and Finance, ebusinessware Pvt. Ltd. Gurgaon, Haryana, who deposed that Sukhinderjit Singh was employed with ebusinessware Pvt. Ltd. Gurgaon as Sr. Software Testing Engineer in an annual package of Rs.5.25 lacs and he has proved the salary certificate of deceased Sukhinderjit Singh as Ex. PW3/3, wherein the gross salary of deceased Sukhinderjit Singh has been mentioned as Rs. 66,607/ p.m . It is pertinent to note that in his deposition, PW3 has specifically stated that the said salary included Rs.16,000/ as Earned Leave Encashment and as such, the said amount i.e Rs. 16,000/ is liable to be deducted from salary of deceased. Further, in the abovesaid salary certificate Ex.PW3/3 , it has been mentioned that a sum of Rs. 2637/ was payable as TDS and hence the said amount of TDS is also liable to be deducted from the salary of deceased. In these circumstances, the salary of deceased Sukhinderjit Singh comes to Rs. 66,607 Rs. 16,000 - Rs. 2637 = Rs.47,970/ p.m. Accordingly, the said salary i.e Rs. 47,970/ is taken as criteria for calculating the loss of dependency to the family in the present case.
In view of the above, the loss of dependency to the family on account of the death of deceased Sukhinderjit Singh can be calculated as under:
a) Salary/income of deceased : Rs. 47,970/ p.m Sukhinderjit Singh
b) 40% addition towards future prospects : Rs. 19,188/ (MACP No. 1493/16 & 1394/16) Jagjit Kaur & Om Prakash Vs. Bhagwan Dass & Anr. 11/32 12
c) 50% deduction towards on personal and living expenses of deceased. : Rs. 33,579/
d) Monthly loss of dependency (Rs. 47,970/ + Rs.19,188/ : Rs. 33,579/ Rs. 33,579/)
e) Annual loss of dependency to the family due to death of deceased : Rs. 4,02,948/ (Rs. 33,579/ x 12)
f) Total loss of dependency to the family due to death of deceased ( Rs. 4,02,948/ x 15) : Rs.60,44,220/ Hence, in view of the above, the total loss of dependency to the family on account of death of deceased Sukhinderjit Singh comes to Rs. 60,44,220 / and as such, the petitioners shall be entitled to the said amount i.e Rs. 60,44,220 / (Rupees Sixty Lacs, Forty Four Thousand, Two Hundred Twenty only) as compensation under the head 'loss of dependency'.
15. LOSS OF ESTATE In terms of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case titled as ' National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi & Ors. ( reported as 2017 SCC OnLine SC 1720), a sum of Rs. 15,000/ is awarded towards the head 'loss of estate'.
16. FUNERAL EXPENSES Further, in terms of the law /guidelines laid down in the case National Insurance Co. Ltd Vs. Pranay Sethi ( supra), a sum of Rs. 15,000/ is awarded to the (MACP No. 1493/16 & 1394/16) Jagjit Kaur & Om Prakash Vs. Bhagwan Dass & Anr. 12/32 13 petitioners towards ' funeral expenses'.
17. LOSS OF FILIAL CONSORTIUM In terms of the law /guidelines laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case titled as 'Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd Vs. Nanu Ram' ( reported as 2018 SCC OnLine SC 1546), a sum of Rs. 80,000/ ( Rs. 40,000/ each to petitioner nos. 1&2) is awarded to the petitioner no.1 Smt. Jagjit Kaur ( mother of the deceased) and petitioner no.2Sh. Pyara Singh Chahal ( father of the deceased) towards 'loss of filial consortium'.
18. LOSS OF LOVE AND AFFECTION In the instant case, due to the death of deceasedSukhinderjit Singh, his parents i.e petitioner no.1 Smt. Jagjit Kaur (mother of the deceased) and petitioner no.2Sh. Pyara Singh Chahal have suffered loss of love and affection. In these circumstances and having regard to the fact and circumstances of the present case and in view of law / guidelines laid down in the case Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd Vs. Nanu Ram (supra), a sum of Rs.60,000/ ( Rs.30,000/ each to petitioner nos. 1&2 ) is awarded as compensation under the head loss of love and affection .
19. The break up of compensation that has been awarded in favour of the petitioners have been tabulated as below : S. No. HEAD AMOUNT 1 Loss of dependency Rs. 60,44,220 /
2. Loss of love and affection (30,000 x 2) Rs. 60,000/ 3 Loss of Filial Consortium (40,000 x 2) Rs.80,000/ (MACP No. 1493/16 & 1394/16) Jagjit Kaur & Om Prakash Vs. Bhagwan Dass & Anr. 13/32 14 4 For funeral expenses Rs.15,000/ 5 Loss of estate Rs.15,000/ 6 TOTAL Rs. 62,14,220/ rounded of as Rs. 62,14,500/
20. 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 petitioners are awarded interest @ 9% per annum on the abovesaid compensation / award amount i.e Rs. 62,14,500/ from the date of filing of petition i.e. 23.1.2012 till realization.
21. RELIEF IN MACP No.1493/16 ( Jagjit Kaur & Anr. Vs. Bhagwan Dass & Anr. ) 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. 62,14,500 / (Rupees Sixty Two Lacs, Fourteen Thousand Five Hundred only) alongwith interest @ 9% p.a from the date of filing of the petition i.e 23.1.2012 till realization is passed in favour of the petitioners herein and against the respondents.
22. APPORTIONMENT The abovesaid award amount i.e Rs. 62,14,500 / (Rupees Sixty Two (MACP No. 1493/16 & 1394/16) Jagjit Kaur & Om Prakash Vs. Bhagwan Dass & Anr. 14/32 15 Lacs, Fourteen Thousand Five Hundred only) shall be apportioned amongst the LRs of the deceasedSukhinderjit Singh in the following manner with proportionate interest .
S. No. Name of the petitioner/relation with deceased Amount
1. Petitioner no.1 Smt. Jagjit Kaur ( mother ) Rs. 42,14,500/
2. Petitioner no.2 Sh. Pyara Singh Chahal ( father ) Rs. 20,00,000/ Total Rs. 62,14,500/
23. FORMIVA SUMMARY OF THE COMPUTATION OF AWARD AMOUNT IN DEATH CASES TO BE INCORPORATED IN THE AWARD
i) Date of accident : 26.11.2011
ii). Name of the deceased : Sukhinderjit Singh
iii). Age of the deceased : 38 years ( at the time of accident)
iv). Occupation of the deceased: Private Service.
v). Income of the deceased : Rs. 47,970/p.m
vi). Name , age and relationship of legal representative of deceased
S.No. Name Age Relation with deceased
(i) Smt. Jagjit Kaur 71 years Mother
(ii) Sh. Pyara Singh Chahal 77 years Father
Computation of Compensation
S. No. Heads Awarded by the Claims
Tribunal
7. Income of the deceased (A) Rs. 47,970/per month
(MACP No. 1493/16 & 1394/16) Jagjit Kaur & Om Prakash Vs. Bhagwan Dass & Anr. 15/32 16
8. AddFuture Prospects (B) Rs. 19,188/
9. LessPersonal expenses of the deceased (C) Rs. 33,579/
10. Monthly loss of dependency Rs. 33,579/ [ (A+B)C=D]
11. Annual Loss of dependency ( D x12) Rs 4,02,948/ 12. Multiplier (E) 15
13. Total loss of dependency (D x 12x E=F) Rs. 60,44,220/
14. Medical Expenses (G)
15. Compensation for loss of love and affection (H) Rs. 60,000/
16. Compensation for loss of filial consortium (I) Rs. 80,000/
17. Compensation for loss of estate (J) Rs. 15,000/
18. Compensation towards funeral expenses (K) Rs. 15,000/
19. TOTAL COMPENSATION Rs. 62,14,220/ rounded of as (F+G+H+I+J+K=L) Rs. 62,14,500/
20. RATE OF INTEREST AWARDED
21. Interest amount up to the date of award (M) @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of petition i.e. 26.11.2011 till realization.
22. Total amount including interest ( L+M) Rs.62,14,500/ + @9% per annum from the date of filing of petition i.e. 26.11.2011 till realization.
23. Award amount released As per table given below
24. Award amount kept in FDRs As per table given below
25. Mode of disbursement of the award amount to By credit in the SB Account of the claimant (s) (Clause 29) the petitioners
6. Next Date for compliance of the award. 06.6.2019 ( Clause 31) (MACP No. 1493/16 & 1394/16) Jagjit Kaur & Om Prakash Vs. Bhagwan Dass & Anr. 16/32 17
24. Further, the statement of petitioner/LRs of the deceased Sukhinderjit Singh regarding their financial status, needs and liabilities have also been recorded in this case. In view of the said statement of the petitioner / LRs of the deceased & 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 FDR Award Amount
1. Smt. Jagjit Kaur Mother Rs. 42,14,500/ Rs. 4,14,500/ Rs. 38 lacs be kept in 100 FDRs of Rs.
38,000/each for the
period from one month
to 100 months in the
name of petitioner no.1
Jagjit Kaur with
cumulative interest.
2. Pyara Singh Chahal Father Rs. 20,00,000/ Rs. 2,00,000/ Rs. 18 lacs be kept in 60
FDRs of Rs. 30,000/
each for the period from
one month to 60 months
in the name of petitioner
no.2 Pyara Singh Chahal
with cumulative interest.
25. The onus to prove the issue no.2 in MACP No. 1394/16 was upon the petitioner/injuredOm Prakash and in order to discharge the said onus, the said petitioner/ injured Om Prakash has examined himself as PW1 and has filed his evidence by way of affidavit (Ex. PW1/A), wherein it has been stated that on 26,11,2011 at about 3:00 p.m he met with an accident due to rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle bearing no. DL1T2249.PW1 further deposed that after the accident, he was taken to J.P.N Trauma Centre, AIIMS, New Delhi for (MACP No. 1493/16 & 1394/16) Jagjit Kaur & Om Prakash Vs. Bhagwan Dass & Anr. 17/32 18 treatment .PW1 deposed that he has spent Rs.1,00,000/ on his treatment and he has also incurred expenses of Rs. 30,000/each on conveyance and special diet. PW1 further deposed that at the time of accident , he was doing private service and was earning Rs. 15,000/ p.m. PW1 has also relied upon the document Ex. PW1/1.
In the present case, from the material and evidence record, it is clear that petitioner/injured Om Prakash has sustained injuries on account of rash and negligent driving of offending vehicle no. DL 1T2249, which was being driven and owned by R1 Bhagwan Dass and insured with R2/IFFCO Tokio General Insurance Company Ltd at the time of accident and as such, petitioner/injured Om Prakash and has become entitled to claim compensation for the injuries sustained by him in the abovesaid accident.
Quantum of compensation payable to the petitioner/injured Om Prakash is ascertained under the following heads :
26. NATURE AND EXTENT OF INJURIES As per the medical treatment record/MLC pertaining to J.P.N Trauma Centre, AIIMS, New Delhi, petitioner/injuredOm Prakash has sustained dangerous injuries in the accident in the instant case.
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 due to the injuries sustained by him in the accident in this case.
27. MEDICINES & TREATMENT In the present case, as per record, the petitioner/injured Om Prakash has undergone treatment at J.P.N Trauma Centre , AIIMS, New Delhi, for the injuries sustained by him in the accident in this case .
(MACP No. 1493/16 & 1394/16) Jagjit Kaur & Om Prakash Vs. Bhagwan Dass & Anr. 18/32 19 In the instant case, the perusal of the record reveals that petitioner/ injured Om Prakash has received almost his entire treatment from the J.P.N Trauma Centre , AIIMS, New Delhi, and no medical bills qua expenses incurred by him on his treatment or medicines, have been placed on record. In these circumstances, the petitioner/injured Om Prakash shall not be entitled to any compensation under this head in this case.
28. CONVEYANCE & SPECIAL DIET In the present case, as per the medical treatment record, petitioner/ injured Om Prakash has sustained dangerous injuries in the accident in the instant case. In these circumstances, the petitioner/injured must have visited the hospital/ doctors for his treatment and would also have required special diet for certain period to recover from the injuries sustained in the accident.
It is being submitted on behalf of the petitioner/injured that he has spent Rs.30,000/each on conveyance and special diet, however no evidence, documentary or otherwise, in this regard has been brought on record on behalf of the petitioner. Further, it is pertinent to note that from the material on record, it is evident that the petitioner/injured has not suffered any permanent disability due to the injuries sustained in the accident in this case.
Hence, in view of the above and in view of the material on record, petitioner/injured is entitled to a sum of Rs. 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. 15,000/ (Rupees Fifteen Thousand Only) towards expenses for special diet.
(MACP No. 1493/16 & 1394/16) Jagjit Kaur & Om Prakash Vs. Bhagwan Dass & Anr. 19/32 20
29. LOSS OF INCOME In the present case, the petitioner/injured stated that he was doing private service and was earning Rs. 15,000/ 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 (26.11.2011) i.e Rs.6,656/ p.m is taken as criteria for calculating the loss of income to the petitioner/ injured.
In the instant case, petitioner/injured has suffered dangerous injuries in the accident in the instant case and has remained hospitalized for about fifteen 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. 6,656/ x 3= Rs. 19,968/ (Rupees Nineteen Thousand Nine Hundred Sixty Eight only) under the head 'Loss of Income'.
30. ATTENDANT CHARGES In the present case, the petitioner/injured has deposed that he has spent a sum of Rs. 50,000/ on attendant, however neither the said attendant has been 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 / injuredOm Prakash has sustained dangerous injuries in the accident in the instant case and he remained hospitalized for about fifteen days due to the said injuries sustained by him in the accident. In these circumstances, the petitioner/ injured must (MACP No. 1493/16 & 1394/16) Jagjit Kaur & Om Prakash Vs. Bhagwan Dass & Anr. 20/32 21 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 his 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'.
31. PAIN & SUFFERINGS As per the settled law, for assessing the pain & sufferings, the following factors have to be taken into account :
(a) Nature of injury
(b) Parts of body where injuries occurred
(c) Surgeries, if any
(d) Confinement in hospital
(e) Duration of the treatment.
In the instant case, in view of the material/evidence on record, there is no element of doubt that the petitioner/injured has has sustained dangerous injuries in the accident in the instant case and has remained hospitalized for about fifteen 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 (MACP No. 1493/16 & 1394/16) Jagjit Kaur & Om Prakash Vs. Bhagwan Dass & Anr. 21/32 22 however, in view of the facts & circumstances of the present case and in view of the material on record, a sum of Rs.70,000/ ( Rupees Seventy Thousand only ) is awarded to the petitioner towards the head " pain & sufferings".
32. LOSS OF ENJOYMENT OF LIFE AND AMENITIES The petitioner/injured has claimed that he has suffered the loss of enjoyment of life and other amenities on account of the accident. The petitioner/ injured was about 60 years of age at the time of accident and has has sustained dangerous injuries in the accident in the instant case and was hospitalized for about fifteen 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. 40,000/ (Rupees Forty 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.
33. The breakup of compensation that has been awarded to the petitioner/ injured Om Prakash is tabulated as below : S.No. HEADS AMOUNT (in Rupees) 1 Medicines & Treatment
2. Conveyance Rs. 15,000/
3. Special Diet Rs. 15,000/ (MACP No. 1493/16 & 1394/16) Jagjit Kaur & Om Prakash Vs. Bhagwan Dass & Anr. 22/32 23
4. Loss of Income Rs. 19,968/
5. Attendant Rs. 12,000/
6. Pain & Sufferings Rs. 70,000/
7. Loss of Enjoyment of Life and Amenities Rs. 40,000/
8. Compensation for mental and physical shock Rs. 20,000/ Total Rs. 1,91,968/ rounded of as Rs. 1,92,000/
34. 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. 1,92,000/ from the date of filing of petition i.e. 18.2.2013 till realization.
35. RELIEF IN MACP No. 1394/16 ( Om Prakash Vs. Bhagwan Dass & Anr.) 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.1,92,000 / (Rupees One Lakh, Ninety Two Thousand only) alongwith interest @ 9% p.a from the date of filing of the petition i.e 18.2.2013 till realization is passed in favour of the petitioner/injured- Om Prakash and against the respondents .
(MACP No. 1493/16 & 1394/16) Jagjit Kaur & Om Prakash Vs. Bhagwan Dass & Anr. 23/32 24
36. FORMIVB SUMMARY OF THE COMPUTATION OF AWARD AMOUNT IN INJURY CASES TO BE INCORPORATED IN THE AWARD
i) Date of accident : 26.11..2011
ii). Name of the injured : Om Prakash
iii). Age of the injured : 60 years ( at the time of accident)
iv). Occupation of the injured : Private Service (at the time of accident)
v). Income of the injured : Rs. 6,656/ p.m
vi). Nature of injury : Dangerous
vii). Medical treatment taken : J.P.N. Trauma Centre, AIIMS, New Delhi by the injured
viii). Period of hospitalization : About fifteen days
ix). Whether any permanent : No disability?If yes, give details
10. Computation of Compensation S. No. Heads Awarded by the Tribunal
11. Pecuniary Loss:
(i) Expenditure on treatment
(ii) Expenditure on conveyance Rs. 15,000/
(iii) Expenditure on special diet Rs. 15,000/
(iv) Cost of attendant Rs. 12,000/
(v) Loss of earning capacity
(vi) Loss of income Rs. 19,968/
(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/
(MACP No. 1493/16 & 1394/16) Jagjit Kaur & Om Prakash Vs. Bhagwan Dass & Anr. 24/32 25 shock
(ii) Pain and suffering Rs. 70,000/
(iii) Loss of amenities of life Rs. 40,000/
(iv) Disfiguration
(v) Loss of marriage prospects
(vi) Loss of earning, inconvenience, hardships, disappointment, frustration, mental stress dejectment and unhappiness in future life etc.,
13. Disability resulting in loss of earning capacity
(i) Percentage of disability assessed and nature N.A of disability as permanent or temporary
(ii) Loss of amenities or loss of expectation of life span on account of disability
(iii) Percentage of loss of earning capacity in relation to disability
(iv) Loss of future income(Income x % Earning Capacity x Multiplier)
14. Total Compensation Rs. 1,91,968/ rounded of as Rs. 1,92,000/
15. INTEREST AWARDED
16. Interest amount up to the date of award @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of petition i.e. 18.2.2013 till realization.
17. Total amount including interest Rs. 1,92,000/ + interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the petition i.e. 18.2.2013 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. 06.6.2019 ( Clause 31) (MACP No. 1493/16 & 1394/16) Jagjit Kaur & Om Prakash Vs. Bhagwan Dass & Anr. 25/32 26
37. Further,the statement of petitioner/injuredOm Prakash regarding his financial status, needs and liabilities have also been recorded in this case . In view 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 Award Release Amount Amount /Period of FDR
1. Om Prakash Injured Rs. 1,92,000/ Rs. 17,000/ Rs. 1.75 lacs be kept in 35 FDRs of Rs. 5,000/ each for the period from one month to 35 months in the name of petitioner/ injured with cumulative interest.
The abovesaid award amount shall be disbursed through Motor Accident Claims Annuity Deposit Scheme (MACAD Scheme) formulated vide orders dated 01.5.2018 and 07.12.2018 passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in FAO No. 842/2013 ( Rajesh Tyagi & Ors. Vs. Jaibir Singh & Ors.).
38. LIABILITY ( In both the cases bearing MACP No. 1493/16 & MACP No.1394/16) The offending vehicle bearing no. DL1T2249 was being driven and owned by respondent no.1 Bhagwan Dass and was insured with respondent no.2/IFFCO Tokio General Insurance Company Ltd at the time of accident and as such, respondent no. 2/IFFCO Tokio General Insurance Company Ltd being the 'principal tort feasor', shall be liable to pay the awarded amount to the petitioners in (MACP No. 1493/16 & 1394/16) Jagjit Kaur & Om Prakash Vs. Bhagwan Dass & Anr. 26/32 27 both these cases bearing MACP No. 1493/16 & MACP No.1394/16.
Hence, in view of the above, Issue No. 2 is decided accordingly.
39. In both these cases bearing MACP No. 1493/16 & MACP No.1394/16, the award amounts shall be deposited/transferred by respondent no. 2/IFFCO Tokio General 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/petitioners and their counsel, to the Nazir of this court .
40. Petitioner Smt. Jagjit Kaur (petitioner no.1 in MACP No. 1493/16) has stated that she is having a SB Account No. 07382122002948 at Oriental Bank of Commerce, Urban State PhaseII, Patiala, Punjab (IFSC Code: ORBC0100738) and it is being requested on her behalf that the abovesaid cash amount may be transferred to the said SB Account .
Accordingly, the Manager, State Bank of India, District Courts Complex, Sector10, Dwarka, New Delhi is directed to transfer the abovesaid cash amount to the abovesaid SB Account No. 07382122002948 of petitioner Smt. Jagjit Kaur at Oriental Bank of Commerce,Urban State PhaseII, Patiala, Punjab and to keep the remaining amount in the form of above mentioned FDRs in terms of Motor Accident Claims Annuity Deposit Scheme (MACAD Scheme) formulated vide Orders dated 01.5.2018 and 07.12.2018 passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in FAO No. 842/2013 ( Rajesh Tyagi & Ors. Vs. Jaibir Singh & Ors.).
Manager, Oriental Bank of Commerce, Urban State PhaseII, Patiala, (MACP No. 1493/16 & 1394/16) Jagjit Kaur & Om Prakash Vs. Bhagwan Dass & Anr. 27/32 28 Punjab is directed to release the abovesaid cash amount to petitioner Smt. Jagjit Kaur as per rules, as prayed.
At the time of maturity, the fixed deposit amount shall be credited in the aforesaid savings bank account of petitioner Smt. Jagjit Kaur .
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 Smt. Jagjit Kaur .
Manager of the concerned bank is directed not to permit premature encashment or loan qua the abovesaid FDRs to the petitioner Smt. Jagjit Kaur without the prior permission of this court.
The said Oriental Bank of Commerce, Urban State PhaseII, Patiala, Punjab is also directed not to issue any cheque book and/or debit card to the petitioner Smt. Jagjit Kaur 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 Smt. Jagjit Kaur.
Oriental Bank of Commerce,Urban State PhaseII, Patiala, Punjab shall permit account holder i.e petitioner Smt. Jagjit Kaur to withdraw money from her abovesaid saving bank account by means of a withdrawal form .
41. Petitioner Sh. Pyara Singh Chahal (petitioner no.2 in MACP No. 1493/16) has stated that he is having a SB Account No. 07382122002955 at Oriental Bank of Commerce, Urban State PhaseII, Patiala, Punjab (IFSC Code:
ORBC0100738) and it is being requested on his behalf that the abovesaid cash amount may be transferred to the said SB Account .
Accordingly, the Manager, State Bank of India, District Courts Complex, (MACP No. 1493/16 & 1394/16) Jagjit Kaur & Om Prakash Vs. Bhagwan Dass & Anr. 28/32 29 Sector10, Dwarka, New Delhi is directed to transfer the abovesaid cash amount to the abovesaid SB Account No. 07382122002955 of petitioner Sh. Pyara Singh Chahal at Oriental Bank of Commerce,Urban State PhaseII, Patiala, Punjab and to keep the remaining amount in the form of above mentioned FDRs in terms of Motor Accident Claims Annuity Deposit Scheme (MACAD Scheme) formulated vide Orders dated 01.5.2018 and 07.12.2018 passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in FAO No. 842/2013 ( Rajesh Tyagi & Ors. Vs. Jaibir Singh & Ors.).
Manager, Oriental Bank of Commerce,Urban State PhaseII, Patiala Punjab is directed to release the abovesaid cash amount to petitioner Sh. Pyara Singh Chahal as per rules, as prayed.
At the time of maturity, the fixed deposit amount shall be credited in the aforesaid savings bank account of petitioner Sh. Pyara Singh Chahal .
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 Sh. Pyara Singh Chahal .
Manager of the concerned bank is directed not to permit premature encashment or loan qua the abovesaid FDRs to the petitioner Sh. Pyara Singh Chahal without the prior permission of this court.
The said Oriental Bank of Commerce,Urban State PhaseII, Patiala, Punjab is also directed not to issue any cheque book and/or debit card to the petitioner Sh. Pyara Singh Chahal 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 Sh. Pyara Singh Chahal.
Oriental Bank of Commerce,Urban State PhaseII, Patiala, Punjab shall (MACP No. 1493/16 & 1394/16) Jagjit Kaur & Om Prakash Vs. Bhagwan Dass & Anr. 29/32 30 permit account holder i.e petitioner Sh. Pyara Singh Chahal to withdraw money from his abovesaid saving bank account by means of a withdrawal form .
42. Petitioner Om Prakash ( petitioner/injured in MACP No.1394/16) has stated that he is having a SB Account No. 650802010002262 at Union Bank of India, Pataudi, Haryana (IFSC Code: UBIN0565083) and it is being requested on his behalf that the abovesaid cash amount may be transferred to the said SB Account .
Accordingly, the Manager, State Bank of India, District Courts Complex, Sector10, Dwarka, New Delhi is directed to transfer the abovesaid cash amount to the abovesaid SB Account No. 650802010002262 of petitioner/injured Om Prakash at Union Bank of India, Pataudi, Haryana and to keep the remaining amount in the form of above mentioned FDRs in terms of Motor Accident Claims Annuity Deposit Scheme (MACAD Scheme) formulated vide Orders dated 01.5.2018 and 07.12.2018 passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in FAO No. 842/2013 ( Rajesh Tyagi & Ors. Vs. Jaibir Singh & Ors.).
Manager, Union Bank of India, Pataudi, Haryana is directed to release the abovesaid cash amount to petitioner/injured Om Prakash as per rules, as prayed.
At the time of maturity, the fixed deposit amount shall be credited in the aforesaid savings bank account of petitioner/injured Om Prakash .
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 Om Prakash .
Manager of the concerned bank is directed not to permit premature encashment or loan qua the abovesaid FDRs to the petitioner/injured Om Prakash (MACP No. 1493/16 & 1394/16) Jagjit Kaur & Om Prakash Vs. Bhagwan Dass & Anr. 30/32 31 without the prior permission of this court.
The said Union Bank of India, Pataudi, Haryana is also directed not to issue any cheque book and/or debit card to the petitioner/ injured Om Prakash 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 Om Prakash.
Union Bank of India, Pataudi, Haryana shall permit account holder i.e petitioner/injured Om Prakash to withdraw money from his abovesaid saving bank account by means of a withdrawal form .
43. The insurance company shall inform the petitioners as well as their counsels 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.
Certified copy of this award be sent to the concerned Manager, SBI, District Courts Complex, Sector10, Dwarka, New Delhi, Manager, Oriental Bank of Commerce,Urban State PhaseII, Patiala, Punjab and Manager,Union Bank of India, Pataudi, Haryana, for information / compliance.
Copy of this award be also sent through e.mail to Sh.Rajan Singh, Assistant General Manager ( Nodal Officer), State Bank of India at his email ID :
[email protected] in terms of Order dated 07.12.2018 passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in FAO No. 842/2003.
Certified copy of this award be given ''Dasti' to the petitioners/ their counsel and Ld. Counsel for the respondent/insurance company.
Certified copy of this award be also sent to the concerned Ld. (MACP No. 1493/16 & 1394/16) Jagjit Kaur & Om Prakash Vs. Bhagwan Dass & Anr. 31/32 32 Metropolitan Magistrate and Delhi State Legal Services Authority.
The main judgment be placed in the file pertaining to the main case bearing MACP No. 1493/16 and the copy thereof be placed in the file of connected case bearing MACP No. 1393/16 .
Ahlmad is directed to prepare separate misc. files and put up the same for filing of the compliance report on 06.6.2019.
File be consigned to the record room.
(Announced in the open (Paramjit Singh)
Court on 03.5.2019) PO, MACT (SouthWest District)
Dwarka Courts, New Delhi
03.5.2019
Digitally
signed by
PARAMJIT
PARAMJIT SINGH
SINGH Date:
2019.05.03
16:18:12
+0530
(MACP No. 1493/16 & 1394/16) Jagjit Kaur & Om Prakash Vs. Bhagwan Dass & Anr. 32/32