Delhi District Court
156/12 Arvind Pandey vs M/S Bharti Axa General Insurance Co. ... on 16 March, 2018
156/12 Arvind Pandey vs M/s Bharti Axa General Insurance co. Page 1 of 18
IN THE COURT OF SH. AMIT BANSAL , PRESIDING OFFICER, MOTOR
ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, NORTH WEST DISTRICT, ROHINI
COURTS, DELHI
New No. 4992716
MACT PETITION No. : 156/12
UNIQUE ID No. : 02404C0092942012
1. Sh. Arvind Pandey
(husband of deceased Smt. Arti)
.....Petitioner No.1.
2. Sh. Krishan Pandey
(minor son of deceased aged about 17 months through his father
petitioner no. 1 being a natural guardian)
......Petitioner No.2.
Both R/o Vill. Sindhor, P.S. Jatwara, Distt. Pratapgarh, UP.
...... Petitioners.
Versus
1. M/s Bharti Axa General Insurance co Ltd.
A8, 2nd Floor, Big Joss Tower, Netaji Subhash Place,
New Delhi34
.... (Insurance co/R1)
2. Sh. Govind Ram S/o Sh. Nathu Ram
R/o Govind Dharam Kanta,
Bawana, Singhana Road, Singhana,
Jhunjhun Rajasthan
......... (Owner /R2)
3. Sh. Satyaveer S/o Sh. Hazari Lal
R/o Vill. Dumoli Khurd, Tehsil Khetri,
P.S. Singhana, Distt. Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan
......... (Driver/R3)
..... Respondents
156/12 Arvind Pandey vs M/s Bharti Axa General Insurance co. Page 1 of 18
156/12 Arvind Pandey vs M/s Bharti Axa General Insurance co. Page 2 of 18
Other details
DATE OF INSTITUTION : 27.03.2012
DATE OF RESERVING JUDGMENT : 08.03.2018
DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 16.03.2018
FORM - V
1. COMPLIANCE OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE MODIFIED CLAIMS
TRIBUNAL AGREED PROCEDURE TO BE MENTIONED IN THE
AWARD AS PER FORMAT REFERRED IN CLAUSE 4.3 OF THE
ORDER PASSED BY THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT IN FAO 842/2003
RAJESH TYAGI Vs. JAIBIR SINGH & ORS. & SOBAT SINGH VS
RAMESH CHANDRA GUPTA & ANR., MAC.APP 422/2009 VIDE
ORDER DATED 15.12.2017
1. Date of the accident 25.02.2012
2. Date of intimation of the accident by the It is outstation
investigating officer to the Claims Tribunal accident of PS
(Clause 2) Kundli, Sonepat,
Haryana
3. Date of intimation of the accident by the It is outstation
investigating officer to the insurance company. accident of PS
(Clause 2) Kundli, Sonepat,
Haryana
4. Date of filing of Report under section 173 Not mentioned in the
Cr.P.C. before the Metropolitan Magistrate record.
(Clause 10)
5. Date of filing of Detailed Accident Information It is outstation
Report (DAR) by the investigating Officer before accident of PS
Claims Tribunal (Clause 10) Kundli, Sonepat,
Haryana
6. Date of Service of DAR on the Insurance It is outstation
Company (Clause 11) accident of PS
Kundli, Sonepat,
Haryana
7. Date of service of DAR on the claimant (s). It is outstation
(Clause 11) accident of PS
Kundli, Sonepat,
156/12 Arvind Pandey vs M/s Bharti Axa General Insurance co. Page 2 of 18
156/12 Arvind Pandey vs M/s Bharti Axa General Insurance co. Page 3 of 18
Haryana.
8. Whether DAR was complete in all respects? It is outstation
(Clause 16) accident of PS
Kundli, Sonepat,
Haryana.
9. If not, whether deficiencies in the DAR removed It is outstation
later on? accident of PS
Kundli, Sonepat,
Haryana.
10. Whether the police has verified the documents It is outstation
filed with DAR? (Clause 4) accident of PS
Kundli, Sonepat,
Haryana.
11. Whether there was any delay or deficiency on It is outstation
the part of the Investigating Officer? If so, accident of PS
whether any action/direction warranted? Kundli, Sonepat,
Haryana.
12. Date of appointment of the Designated Officer It is outstation
by the insurance Company. (Clause20) accident of PS
Kundli, Sonepat,
Haryana.
13. Name, address and contact number of the It is outstation
Designated Officer of the Insurance Company. accident of PS
(Clause 20) Kundli, Sonepat,
Haryana
14. Whether the designated Officer of the Insurance It is outstation
Company submitted his report within 30 days of accident of PS
the DAR? (Clause 20) Kundli, Sonepat,
Haryana
15. Whether the insurance company admitted the It is outstation
liability? If so, whether the Designated Officer of accident of PS
the insurance company fairly computed the Kundli, Sonepat,
compensation in accordance with law. (Clause Haryana
23)
16. Whether there was any delay or deficiency on It is outstation
the part of the Designated Officer of the accident of PS
Insurance Company? If so, whether any Kundli, Sonepat,
action/direction warranted? Haryana
17. Date of response of the claimant (s) to the offer It is outstation
of the Insurance Company .(Clause 24) accident of PS
Kundli, Sonepat,
Haryana
18. Date of the Award 16.03.2018
156/12 Arvind Pandey vs M/s Bharti Axa General Insurance co. Page 3 of 18
156/12 Arvind Pandey vs M/s Bharti Axa General Insurance co. Page 4 of 18
19. Whether the award was passed with the consent No
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 15.01.2018
directed 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 08.03.2018
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 As mentioned above
Claimant(s) (Clause 27)
24. Details of saving bank account(s) of the Petitioner no. 1
claimant(s) and the address of the bank with Arvind Pandey
IFSC Code (Clause 27) savings bank a/c no.
37528451848 and
Petitioner no. 2
Krishan Pandey
savings bank a/c no.
37526372106 with
SBI, Malkapuram,
Vishkhapatnam,
IFSC : SBIN0001738
25. Whether the claimant(s) saving bank account(s) Yes
is near his place of residence? (Clause 27)
26. Whether the claimant(s) were examined at the Yes
time of passing of the award. (Clause 27)
27. Account number/CIF No, MICR number, IFSC 86143654123,
Code, name and branch of the bank of the 110002427,
Claims Tribunal in which the award amount is to SBIN0010323, SBI,
be deposited/transferred. (in terms of order Rohini Courts, Delhi
dated 18.01.2018 of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in
FAO 842/2003 Rajesh Tyagi vs Jaibir Singh.
156/12 Arvind Pandey vs M/s Bharti Axa General Insurance co. Page 4 of 18
156/12 Arvind Pandey vs M/s Bharti Axa General Insurance co. Page 5 of 18
JUDGMENT
1. Present claim petition has been preferred under Section 166 and 140 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') claiming compensation for a sum of Rs. 25,00,000/ (Rupees Twenty five Lakhs Only) along with interest @ 18% p.a. in respect of accidental death of Smt. Arti w/o Sh. Arvind Pandey in a motor vehicular accident.
2. The petitioners have averred in the petition that on 25.02.2012 the deceased Smt. Aarti was sitting on motorcycle bearing no. HR10K7589 on pillion seat, the said motorcycle was being driven by her husband namely Arvind Pandey and they were going to village Sersa from Biswa mill. At about 1:10 pm when they reached on Delhi road in front of Ansal Plaza then one truck bearing registration no. RJ18GA4064 (hereinafter referred to as 'offending vehicle') came from behind at a very fast speed and in a rash and negligent manner and hit the said motorcycle with great force. As a result of the said accident the wheel of the offending vehicle passed over the body of Smt. Aarti and she died at the spot.
The postmortem on the dead body of deceased was conducted by doctors of General hospital, Sonepat, Haryana.
It has been mentioned in the petition that FIR No. 79/2012 u/s 279/304 A IPC was registered at PS Kundli, Sonepat, Haryana.
It was mentioned in the petition that at the time of the death, the age of the deceased was about 24 years, she was self employed, was in the occupation of knitting and stitching and was earning Rs. 8000/ per month.
On the basis of these averments, the petitioners/claimants have claimed compensation to the tune of Rs. 25,00,000/ along with interest @ 18% per annum against the respondents.
3. R1/Bharti Axa General Insurance co. Ltd filed its written statement and submitted that the vehicle bearing no. RJ18GA4064 (offending vehicle) was 156/12 Arvind Pandey vs M/s Bharti Axa General Insurance co. Page 5 of 18 156/12 Arvind Pandey vs M/s Bharti Axa General Insurance co. Page 6 of 18 insured with it vide policy no. FCV/I0589484 valid from 18.05.2011 to 17.05.2012 i.e. covering the date of accident dated 25.02.2012. It was further inter alia submitted that the accident was caused due to negligence on the part of the deceased and/or the driver of the motorcycle on which deceased was travelling at the time of accident.
4. R2/ who is the owner of the offending vehicle and R3/who is driver of the offending vehicle have filed their written statement jointly wherein they have stated that the accident was not caused due to the fault and negligence of R3. They have further submitted that accident was caused due to sole negligence of the petitioner no. 1 and petitioners have falsely implicated the respondents in collusion with the police to extort money. It was mentioned that R3 was driving the said offending vehicle in the moderate speed observing the traffic rules, when all of a sudden, the petitioner no. 1 who was driving the above said motorcycle in a rash, negligent and zig zag manner came in front of the truck and despite applying emergency brakes, R3 could not avoid the accident. It was further mentioned that offending vehicle was comprehensively insured with R1 on the date of the accident.
5. From the pleadings of the parties, the following issues were finally framed by Ld. Predecessor of this court vide order dated 30.08.2013: (1) Whether on 25.02.12 at about 1:10 pm at Pitampura Mor, GT Road, Kundli PS Kundli Truck bearing registration No. RJ18G 4069 which was being driven rashly and negligently by Satyaveer hit the motorcycle no. HR10K7589 on which Aarti (deceased) was a pillion rider and caused her death?
(2). Whether petitioners are entitled to compensation, if so, to what amount and from whom?
(3). Relief.
6. The petitioners in support of their case have examined Sh. Arvind Pandey (petitioner no.1/husband of deceased/eye witness) as PW1.
On the other hand, respondents did not lead any evidence in 156/12 Arvind Pandey vs M/s Bharti Axa General Insurance co. Page 6 of 18 156/12 Arvind Pandey vs M/s Bharti Axa General Insurance co. Page 7 of 18 support of their respective case.
7. I have heard the arguments addressed on behalf of ld counsel for petitioners and ld counsel for R1/Insurance co . Now, I proceed to discuss the issues in the succeeding paragraphs.
8. Issue wise findings are as under: ISSUES NO. 1 The onus to prove this issue beyond preponderance of probabilities is upon the petitioners.
PW1 Sh. Arvind Pandey (petitioner no. 1) who is eye witness has examined himself in support of the petition. He has filed and proved his evidence by way of affidavits as Ex. PW1/A. He has proved the certified copies of criminal case record as Ex. PW1/1 (colly), death certificate of deceased issued by Gram Panchayat Pradhan as Ex. PW1/2 and copy of ration card of PW1 is Ex. PW1/3.
He has deposed on the lines of the claim petition.
PW1 was cross examined only on behalf of R1/insurance co. wherein he has deposed that at the time of accident he was driving the motorcycle on the left side of the road and deceased along with 1 ½ years old child were sitting on the motorcycle. He has deposed that he was going straight on the road and offending vehicle came from behind. He further deposed that the left portion of the truck had struck against the right portion of the motorcycle and that traffic was heavy on the road at the time of accident. He has deposed that offending truck was caught by the public persons after chasing it at some distance away from the spot. He has denied the suggestions that no such accident had taken place with the truck bearing registration no. RJ18GA4064 or that accident took place with some other vehicle due to his own sole negligence or that he was driving the motorcycle rashly and negligently in violation of rules and regulations of traffic. He has denied the suggestion that deceased fell down from the motorcycle as she lost her balance while holding the child. His remaining cross examination is 156/12 Arvind Pandey vs M/s Bharti Axa General Insurance co. Page 7 of 18 156/12 Arvind Pandey vs M/s Bharti Axa General Insurance co. Page 8 of 18 not germane to the issue in hand.
He was not cross examined on behalf of R2 and R3 and their cross examination was nil opportunity given. R2 and R3 shall be deemed to admit the testimony of PW1 to the effect that the case accident was caused by offending vehicle being driven by R3 in a rash and negligent manner.
PW1 who is an eye witnesses of the accident has deposed to the effect that the case accident was caused by the offending vehicle being driven by R3 in a rash and negligent manner and at a high speed. The certified copies of criminal case record Ex. PW1/1 (colly) would also show that the case FIR No. 79/12 u/s 279/337/304A IPC PS Kundli was registered. The charge sheet u/s 279/337/304A IPC was registered against R3/driver of the offending vehicle. The postmortem report of deceased is on record which would show the cause of death of the deceased in this case is shock and hemorrhage as a result of injuries described in PMR which are antemortem in nature and sufficient to cause death in normal course of events.
Nothing has also appeared in the cross examination of PW1 to discredit his testimony. In the said circumstances, it has been clearly proved beyond preponderance of probabilities that the case accident was caused at the above said date, time and place and in the above said manner by the rash and negligent driving of R3 by which he drove the offending vehicle rashly and negligently at a fast speed and hit the deceased thereby causing her death.
Issue no.1 is decided in favour of petitioners and against the respondents accordingly.
9. Issue No. (2) In view of my findings on issue no.1, the petitioners are entitled to compensation.
(a) PW1 ( husband of the deceased) has deposed through his evidence by way of affidavit Ex. PW1/A and has proved various documents Ex. PW1/1 to Ex. PW1/3. The copy of postmortem report of deceased is on record which mentions the age of deceased as 24 years at the time of accident.
156/12 Arvind Pandey vs M/s Bharti Axa General Insurance co. Page 8 of 18 156/12 Arvind Pandey vs M/s Bharti Axa General Insurance co. Page 9 of 18PW1 deposed that his wife was doing the work of knitting and stitching and was earning Rs. 8,000/ per month. During cross examination as conducted by insurance co./R1 he has clearly admitted that he has no documentary proof to show that the deceased was doing the work of knitting and stitching or that she was earning any amount on the date of accident.
In view of the said discussion, it would be appropriate to assess the income of the deceased on the basis of minimum wages of an unskilled worker as fixed by the Govt. of NCT of Delhi under the Minimum Wages Act. The minimum wages of an unskilled worker at the relevant time on the date of accident was Rs. 6656/ p.m. Accordingly, it would be reasonable and just to consider the income of deceased as Rs. 6,656/ per month on the date of accident in question.
(b) Addition of future prospects If addition in income towards future prospects is to be made In this regard, reference should be made to the latest Constitutional Bench Judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in case of National Insurance Company Limited vs. Pranay Sethi & Ors, SLP (Civil) No. 25590 of 2014, date of decision 31.10.2017.
In the said judgment of Pranay Sethi (Supra), the Hon'ble Apex Court interalia held as under:
61. In view of the aforesaid analysis, we proceed to record our conclusions:
(i).........................................................................................
(ii) .....................................................................................
(iii) While determining the income, an addition of 50% of actual salary to the income of the deceased towards future prospects, where the deceased had a permanent job and was below the age of 40 years, should be made. The addition should be 30% , if the age of the deceased was between 40 to 50 years. In case the deceased was between the age of 50 to 60 years, the addition should be 15%. Actual salary should be read as actual salary 156/12 Arvind Pandey vs M/s Bharti Axa General Insurance co. Page 9 of 18 156/12 Arvind Pandey vs M/s Bharti Axa General Insurance co. Page 10 of 18 less tax.
(iv) In case the deceased was selfemployed or on a fixed salary, an addition of 40% of the established income should be the warrant where the deceased was below the age of 40 years. An addition of 25% where the deceased was between the age of 40 to 50 years and 10% where the deceased was between the age of 50 to 60 years should be regarded as the necessary method of computation. The established income means the income minus the tax component.
(v) For the determination of the multiplicand, the deduction for personal and living expenses, the tribunals and the courts shall be guided by paragraphs 30 to 32 of Sarla Verma which we have reproduced hereinbefore.
(vi) The selection of multiplier shall be as indicated in the Table in Sarla Verma read with paragraph 42 of that judgment.
(vii) The age of the deceased should be the basis for applying the multiplier.
(viii) Reasonable figures on conventional heads, namely, loss of estate, loss of consortium and future expenses should be Rs. 15,000/, Rs. 40,000/ and Rs. 15,000/ respectively. The aforesaid amounts should be enhanced at the rate of 10% in every three years. "
(.... Emphasis Supplied) In the case in hand, the deceased was a self employed person who was doing the work of knitting and stitching and in terms of above said judgment, while determining her income for computing compensation, future prospects have to be added to fall within the ambit and sweep of just compensation under Section 168 of M.V. Act.
The age of the deceased, as discussed above, in the present case was about 24 years as per postmortem report. In view of paragraph no.156/12 Arvind Pandey vs M/s Bharti Axa General Insurance co. Page 10 of 18 156/12 Arvind Pandey vs M/s Bharti Axa General Insurance co. Page 11 of 18
61 (iv) of above said judgment in Pranay Sethi (Supra), the deceased would be entitled to an addition of 40% of the established income as she was between the below the age of 40 years at the time of her death.
The monthly income of the deceased is thus calculated as 6656/ +40% of 6656/ which comes to Rs. 6656+ Rs. 2662/(after rounding off). = Rs. 9,318/.
(c) Deduction towards personal and living expenses of the deceased:
Petitioner no. 1 is the husband of deceased, petitioners no 2 is the minor sons of deceased.
In the present case, the deceased was married and her dependent family members were 2, hence, the deduction towards personal and living expenses of the deceased should be 1/3rd in view of the settled law by the Hon'ble Apex Court in cases of Sarla Verma vs. Delhi Transport Corporation, 2009 ACJ 1298: (2009) 6 SCC 121 which has been upheld by the Constitutional Bench of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Pranay Sethi (Supra) in paragraph no 61 (v) of the judgment.
(d) Selection of multiplier:
As discussed above, the age of the deceased was about 24 years at the time of her death. In view of paragraph no. 61(vii) of the judgment in the case of Pranay Sethi (Supra), the age of deceased should be the basis for applying the multiplier. As per the case of Sarla Verma (Supra), the multiplier of 18 is to be adopted when the age of the victim is between 21 years to 25 years. Accordingly, the relevant multiplier would be "18" as per judgment in case of Sarla Verma (Supra) which has been upheld in paragraph no. 61 (vi) in case of Pranay Sethi (Supra).
(e) Loss of financial dependency In the light of aforesaid facts, loss of financial dependency of the petitioner comes to Rs. 13,41,792/ [i.e. Rs. 9318/ ( per month income of the deceased) X12 X18 (multiplier) X2/3 (dependency)].156/12 Arvind Pandey vs M/s Bharti Axa General Insurance co. Page 11 of 18 156/12 Arvind Pandey vs M/s Bharti Axa General Insurance co. Page 12 of 18
10. Compensation under nonpecuniary heads/conventional heads:
In view of the judgment of Constitution Bench of Hon'ble Apex Court in case of Pranay Sethi (Supra), as held in paragraph number 61 (viii) of the said judgment, the petitioners would be entitled to Rs. 15,000/ towards loss of estate and Rs. 15,000/ towards funeral expenses. Petitioner no. 1 who is the husband of deceased would be entitled to Rs. 40,000/ towards loss of consortium.
11. LOSS OF LOVE & AFFECTION The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the latest case of Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Ltd. Vs Pooja & Ors, MAC Appeal 798/2011, date of decision 02.11.2017 after referring to the judgment of "National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi & Ors.", passed in SLP(Civil) No. 25590/14 decided on 31.10.17 delivered by Constitutional Bench of Hon'ble Apex Court, accepted the submissions of the ld counsel for the insurer that nonpecuniary heads of damages would have to be restricted to the total of Rs. 70,000/ only, in view of the dispensation in Pranay Sethi (Supra). The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the said case further held that the Constitution Bench decision did not recognize any other nonpecuniary head of damages (except loss of estate, loss of consortium and funeral expenses).
In view of above said discussion, the petitioners would not be entitled to any amount under the said head of loss of love and affection.
12. Petitioners/claimants are accordingly entitled to compensation computed as under:
Loss of financial dependency Rs. 13,41,792/ Loss of Estate Rs. 15,000/ Loss of Consortium Rs. 40,000/ Funeral Expenses Rs. 15,000/ ________________ Total Rs. 14,11,792/ ________________ [Rounded off to Rs. 14,11,800/] 156/12 Arvind Pandey vs M/s Bharti Axa General Insurance co. Page 12 of 18 156/12 Arvind Pandey vs M/s Bharti Axa General Insurance co. Page 13 of 18 (Rupees Fourteen Lakhs Eleven Thousand Eight Hundred only) The claimants/petitioners are also entitled to interest @ 9% p.a. for the date of filing of petition i.e. w.e.f 27.03.2012 till realisation of the compensation amount. The said interest @ 9% p.a. was awarded on the award amount by the Hon'ble Apex Court in case Municipal Corporation of Delhi vs. Association of Victims of Uphaar Tragedy, 2012 ACJ 48 (SC) .
The amount of interim award, if any, shall however be deducted from the above amount, if the same has already been paid to the petitioners.
13. Liability In the case in hand, the Bharti Axa General insurance company/R1 has not been able to show anything on record that R3, who was the driver of the offending vehicle was not having any valid driving licence to drive the offending vehicle or that the permit of offending vehicle was not valid and as per settled law, since the offending vehicle was duly insured with the insurance company/R1, hence R1 is liable to pay the entire compensation amount to the petitioner as per law.
14. Accordingly, in the case in hand, in terms of order dated 16.05.2017 of Hon'ble High Court by Hon'ble Mr. Justice J.R. Midha in case of Rajesh Tyagi Vs. Jaibir Singh and Ors., R1/Bharti Axa General Insurance co is directed to deposit the awarded amount of Rs. 14,11,800/ within 30 days from today within the jurisdiction of this Tribunal i.e. State Bank of India, Rohini Courts Branch, Delhi alongwith interest at the rate of 9 % per annum from the date of filing of the petition till notice of deposition of the awarded amount to be given by R1/Insurance co to the petitioners and their advocates and to show or deposit the receipt of the acknowledgement with the Nazir as per rules. R1/insurance co further directed to deposit the awarded amount in the above said bank by means of cheque drawn in the name of above said bank alongwith the name of the claimants mentioned therein. The said bank is further directed to keep the said amount in fixed 156/12 Arvind Pandey vs M/s Bharti Axa General Insurance co. Page 13 of 18 156/12 Arvind Pandey vs M/s Bharti Axa General Insurance co. Page 14 of 18 deposit in its own name till the claimants approach the bank for disbursement, so that the awarded amount starts earning interest from the date of clearance of the cheque.
APPORTIONMENT
15. Statement of petitioners in terms of clause 27 MCTAP was recorded. I have heard the petitioners and ld. counsel for the petitioners/claimants regarding financial needs of the injured/petitioner and in view of the judgment in the case of General Manager, Kerala State Road Transport Corporation Vs. Susamma Thomas & Others, 1994 (2) SC, 1631, for appropriate investments to safeguard the amount from being frittered away by the beneficiaries owing to their ignorance, illiteracy and being susceptible to exploitation, following arrangements are hereby ordered: Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, on realization, an amount of Rs. 8,00,000/ be given to Krishna Pandey petitioner no. 2 who is minor son of deceased and entire amount be kept in FDR in his name till he attains the age of majority. The maturity amount of the FDR be transferred in savings bank a/c no. 37526372106 with SBI, Malkapuram, Visakhapatnam which is in the name of Krishna Pandey. Further, remaining amount be given to Sh. Arvind Pandey (who is husband of deceased/petitioner no.1 ) out of which an amount of Rs. 1,00,000/ be released to his in his savings bank a/c no.37528451848 with SBI, Malkapuram Branch, Visakhapatnam i.e. the branch near his place of residence (as mentioned in statement recorded under clause 27 MCTAP) and remaining amount be kept in 60 FDRs of equal amount for a period of one month to 60 months with cumulative interest without the facility of advance, loan and premature withdrawal without the prior permission of the Tribunal.
It shall be subject to the following further directions:
(a) The bank shall not permit any joint name(s) to be added in the savings bank account or fixed deposit accounts of the victim i.e. 156/12 Arvind Pandey vs M/s Bharti Axa General Insurance co. Page 14 of 18 156/12 Arvind Pandey vs M/s Bharti Axa General Insurance co. Page 15 of 18 the saving bank account(s) of the claimant(s) shall be individual savings account(s) and not a joint account(s).
(b) The original fixed deposit shall be retained by the bank in safe custody. However, the statement containing FDR number, FDR amount, date of maturity and maturity amount shall be furnished by bank to the claimant(s).
(c) The maturity amount of the FDR(s) shall be credited to the saving bank account of the claimant(s) in a nationalised bank near the place of his residence i.e. above said a/c.
(e) No loan, advance or withdrawal or premature discharge be allowed on the fixed deposits without permission of the court.
(f) The concerned Bank shall not to issue any cheque book and/or debit card to claimant(s). However, in case the debit card and/or cheque book have already been issued, bank shall cancel the same before the disbursement of the award amount.
(g) The bank shall make an endorsement on the passbook of the claimant(s) to the effect, that no cheque book and/or debit card have been issued and shall not be issued without the permission of the court and claimant(s) shall produce the passbook with the necessary endorsement before the court on the next date fixed for compliance.
16. Relief As discussed above, R1/Insurance co is directed to deposit the award amount of Rs. 14,11,800/ with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of petition i.e. 27.03.2012 till realization within the jurisdiction of this Tribunal i.e. SBI , Rohini Court Branch, Delhi within 30 days from today under intimation of deposition of the awarded amount to be given by R1/insurance co to the petitioners and their advocates failing which the R1 shall be liable to pay interest @ 12% per annum from the period of delay beyond 30 days.
156/12 Arvind Pandey vs M/s Bharti Axa General Insurance co. Page 15 of 18 156/12 Arvind Pandey vs M/s Bharti Axa General Insurance co. Page 16 of 18R1 is also directed to place on record the proof of the award amount, proof of delivery of notice in respect of deposit of the amount in the above said bank to the claimants and complete details in respect of calculations of interest etc in the court within 30 days from today. A copy of this judgment/award be sent to respondent no. 1 for compliance within the granted time.
Nazir is directed to place a report on record in the event of non receipt/deposit of the compensation amount within the granted time.
A copy of this award be forwarded to the concerned Metropolitan Magistrate and DLSA in terms of the orders passed by the Hon'ble High Court in FAO 842/2003 Rajesh Tyagi Vs. Jaibir Singh & Ors. vide order dated 12.12.2014.
In view of the directions contained in order dated 18.01.2018 of Hon'ble Mr. Justice J.R. Midha in FAO no. 842/2003 titled as Rajesh Tyagi vs Jaibir Singh, the statement of ld counsel for all petitioners was also recorded wherein he had stated that the petitioners were entitled to exemption from deduction of TDS and that they would submit form 15G to the insurance co. so that no TDS is deducted.
17. Form IVA which has been duly filled in has also been attached herewith. File be consigned to record room as per rules after compliance of necessary legal formalities. Copy of order be given to parties for necessary compliance as per rules.
Announced in open court (AMIT BANSAL)
on 16th March 2018 PO MACT N/W
Rohini Courts, Delhi.
156/12 Arvind Pandey vs M/s Bharti Axa General Insurance co. Page 16 of 18
156/12 Arvind Pandey vs M/s Bharti Axa General Insurance co. Page 17 of 18
FORM - IV A
SUMMARY OF COMPUTATION OF AWARD AMOUNT IN DEATH CASES TO BE INCORPORATED IN THE AWARD
1. Date of accident : 25.02.2012
2. Name of deceased: Aarti
3. Age of the deceased: 24 years
4. Occupation of the deceased: Self employed/private job
5. Income of the deceased: 9318/ per month
6. Name, age and relationship of legal representatives of deceased:
S.No. Name Age Relation
(i) Sh. Arvind Pandey 36 years son
(ii) Krishna Pandey 7 years Son
(iii)
(iv)
Computation of Compensation
S.No. Heads Awarded by the Claims
Tribunal
7. Income of the deceased (A) Rs. 6656/ .
8. AddFuture Prospects (B) 40%= Rs. 2662/
9. LessPersonal expenses of the 1/3rd
deceased (C )
10. Monthly loss of dependency 6212/
{ (A+B) - C =D}
11. Annual loss of dependency (Dx12) 74,544/
12. Multiplier (E) 18
13. Total loss of dependency (Dx12xE 13,41,792/ = F)
14. Medical Expenses (G)
15. Compensation for loss of love and Nil affection (H)
16. Compensation for loss of Rs. 40,000/ 156/12 Arvind Pandey vs M/s Bharti Axa General Insurance co. Page 17 of 18 156/12 Arvind Pandey vs M/s Bharti Axa General Insurance co. Page 18 of 18 consortium (I)
17. Compensation for loss of estate (J) Rs. 15,000/
18. Compensation towards funeral Rs. 15,000/ expenses (K)
19. TOTAL COMPENSATION Rs. 14,11,800/ (F+G+H+I+J+K =L)
20. RATE OF INTEREST AWARDED 9% 21 Interest amount up to the date of Rs. 7,51,778/ award (M)
22. Total amount including interest Rs. 21,63,578/ (L+M)
23. Award amount released Rs. 1,00,000/ to the petitioners.
24. Award amount kept in FDRs Rs. 20,63,578/
25. Mode of disbursement of the award As per award and in terms amount to the claimant (s) (Clause of clause 29 of MCTAP.
29)
26. Next date for compliance of the 25.04.2018.
award. (Clause 31) (AMIT BANSAL) PO MACT N/W Rohini Courts, Delhi.
16.03.2018 156/12 Arvind Pandey vs M/s Bharti Axa General Insurance co. Page 18 of 18