Delhi District Court
Nidhi Singh Pandey & Ors vs . Nitin Garg & Ors on 5 December, 2019
IN THE COURT OF DR. HARDEEP KAUR
ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE
PO MACT(SE), SAKET COURTS: NEW DELHI
MACT No.4549/16
FIR No. 30/16
PS : Indrapuram
Nidhi Singh Pandey & Ors Vs. Nitin Garg & Ors
U/s: 279/304A/337/338/427 IPC
CNR No.DLSE010025472016
COMPENSATION IN DEATH CASE OF DECEASED AMAN PANDEY AGED
ABOUT 25 YEARS
1. Nidhi Singh Pandey
W/o Late Aman Pandey
(wife about 33 years)
2. Sushma Pandey
S/o Gargeshwar Pandey
(Mother, aged about 50 years)
3. Gargeshwar Pandey
S/o Sh. Shivdayal Pandey
(Father, aged about 52 years)
4. Shivani Pandey
D/o Sh. Gargeshwar Pandey
(Sister of deceased)
All are R/o:
C5, Suraksha Appartment
Indira Puram, Abhay Khand
Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh.
Permanent R/o Plot no. 4,
Shiv Vihar, Pankey Road, Kalyanpur
District Kanpur, Uttar Pradesh.
.......Claimants/petitioners
MACT No. 4549/16 Nidhi Singh Pandey & Ors. Vs. Nitin Garg & Ors. Page No. 1 of 20
VERSUS
1. Nitin Garg @ Nishant Garg
S/o Ashok Kumar Garg
R/o D63A, Patel NagarII, Ghaziabad
Uttar Pradesh
...Driver/respondent No.1
2. Pushpa Gupta W/o Sh. Ashok Gupta R/o D63A, Patel NagarII, Ghaziabad Uttar Pradesh ...Owner/respondent No.2
3. United India Ins. Co. Ltd.
1770, Gali no. 7, 1st Floor, Govindpuri, Kalkaji, New Delhi.
..Insurance Company/Respondent No. 3
.....Respondents
Date of accident : 01.01.2016
Date of filing petition : 18.04.2016
Date of Decision : 05.12.2019
AWARD
1. Claim petitions, where no serious question of law or fact are involved can be disposed off by short orders. Negligence on the part of respondent no.1 is to be proved on the basis of preponderance of probability, quantum of compensation is to be determined and in case MACT No. 4549/16 Nidhi Singh Pandey & Ors. Vs. Nitin Garg & Ors. Page No. 2 of 20 the insurance company has raised any defence the liability to pay compensation is to be fixed.
2. Brief facts of the case are that on 01.01.2016, at about 01.00 pm, petitioner along with her husband Aman Pandey was going to Hastnapur, District Meerut from their house by motorcycle no. UP 14CC 5136 which was being driven by her husband. The brother in law of petitioner namely Aakash Pandey and his one friend were also following them in another motorcycle at some distance. When they reached near Vashundhara Police Chowki, Hind Nahar Road, PS Indirapuram, Distt. Ghaziabad, all of a sudden Respondent no.1 while driving car bearing no. UP 14BR 4000 at a very rash and negligent manner hit the middle portion of the motorcycle of petitioner from the front portion of his car with great force. As a result of which they fell down on the road and petitioner and her husband sustained grievous injuries.
3. Thereafter, the police PCR took the injured to the hospital at Narender Hospital, Mohan Nagar, Ghaziabad where his MLC no. 11647/16 prepared and later on transferred to Sir Ganga Ram Hospital on the same day i.e. 01.01.2016, where he expired during the course of the treatment on 05.01.2016. His Postmortem was conducted at Mortuary Maulana Azad Medical College & Lok Nayak Hospital, New Delhi vide PMR no. 13/16 on 06.01.2016.
4. The police after investigation, FIR No. 30/16 PS Indirapuram, filed charge sheet against respondent No. 1 under Section MACT No. 4549/16 Nidhi Singh Pandey & Ors. Vs. Nitin Garg & Ors. Page No. 3 of 20 279/304A/337/338/427 IPC.
5. In response to the present claim petition, respondent No. 1 and respondent No. 2 appeared in the court and filed their Written Statement stating that the present petition is not maintainable as accident did not take place due to the negligence of answering respondent no.1.
6. In response to the claim petition Insurance Company filed Written Statement stating that the accident did not take place due to the negligence of driver of offending vehicle rather it was deceased himself who was driving motorcycle bearing no. UP 14CC 5136 in rash and negligent manner. It is admitted that vehicle bearing no. UP 14BR 4000 was insured with the answering respondent vide policy no. 0423813115P110847986 for the period 15.12.2015 to 14.12.2016 in the name of Pushpa Gupta.
7. From the pleadings of parties, the following issues were framed on 24.03.2017 by the Ld. Predecessor of this Tribunal:
1. Whether the deceased Aman Pandey suffered fatal injuries in a road traffic accident on 01.01.2016 due to rash and negligent driving of vehicle no. UP 14BR 4000 being driven by R1, owned by R2 and insured with R3? OPP
2. Whether the petitioners are entitled to any compensation, if so, to what extent and from whom ? OPP.
3. Relief.
8. The Petitioner No.2 Nidhi Singh Pandey (wife of deceased and MACT No. 4549/16 Nidhi Singh Pandey & Ors. Vs. Nitin Garg & Ors. Page No. 4 of 20 eye witness) examined herself as PW2. She tendered her evidence by way of affidavit Ex.PW2/A and relied upon the documents i.e. admission summary of Sir Ganga Ram Hospital as Ex. PW2/1, letter dated 03.02.2015 issued by Adobe Systems India Pvt Ltd in favour of her husband regarding new Hire RSU Award as Ex.PW2/2, offer of appointment given by M/s Adobe Systems Private Limited dated 23.09.2015 to her deceased husband as Ex.PW2/3, ID card of her husband issued by M/s Adobe Systems Private Limited as Ex.PW2/4, educational qualifications certificates of her deceased husband as Ex.PW2/5, Copy of PAN card of her deceased husband as Ex.PW2/6, Copy of DL of her deceased husband as Ex.PW2/8, Copy of her Aadhar Card as Ex.PW2/9, Copy of Aadhar Card of her mother in law Mrs. Sushma Pandey as Ex.PW2/10, Copy of Aadhar Card of her father in law Sh. Gangeshwar Pandey as Ex.PW2/11, Certified copy of FIR and site plan as Ex.PW2/12, Copy of her marriage certificate as Ex.PW2/13.
9. In her evidence by way of affidavit, PW2 deposed that on 01.01.2016, at about 01.00 pm, she along with her husband Aman Pandey was going to Hastnapur, District Meerut from their house by motorcycle no. UP 14CC 5136 which was being driven by her husband. The brother in law of petitioner namely Aakash Pandey and his one friend were also following them in another motorcycle at some distance. When they reached near Vashundhara Police Chowki, Hind Nahar Road, PS Indirapuram, Distt. Ghaziabad, all of a sudden Respondent no.1 while driving car bearing no. UP 14BR 4000 at a very rash and negligent manner hit the middle portion of the motorcycle of petitioner from the front portion of his car with great force. As a result of which MACT No. 4549/16 Nidhi Singh Pandey & Ors. Vs. Nitin Garg & Ors. Page No. 5 of 20 they fell down on the road and petitioner and her husband sustained grievous injuries.
10. During cross examination witness deposed that she has received Rs. 10 lakhs towards Accidental Insurance Policy. Her husband has joined the company Adobe Systems India Private Limited about 6 months before his death. She further deposed that there was no central verge on the road on which the accident took place. She denied the suggestion that offending vehicle was moving in the lawful and right direction at normal speed.
11. Petitioners have also examined Sh. Aditya Kumar (on behalf of employer of the deceased) as PW1 who proved the salary slips of deceased Aman Pandey for the period March, 2015 to 04.09.2015 as Ex.PW1/3, appointment letter dated 03.02.2015, service certificate dated 04.09.2015 and relieving letter dated 04.09.2015 as Ex.PW1/4 (colly). He deposed that deceased Aman Pandey was reemployed vide appointment letter dated 23.09.2015 and the same is Ex.PW1/5. Deceased worked from 05.10.2015 to 05.01.2016 as per service certificate dated 05.01.2016 and same is Ex.PW1/6, his salary slips for the period 05.10.2015 to 05.01.2016 are ExPW1/7 (colly). During cross examination, PW1 deposed that the deceased was covered by Term Life Insurance Policy for which a sum of Rs 20 lakhs was paid. He further deposed that 50% of PF amount was paid to wife and 50% to the mother of deceased.
12. No other evidence was led on behalf of petitioners.
MACT No. 4549/16 Nidhi Singh Pandey & Ors. Vs. Nitin Garg & Ors. Page No. 6 of 20
13. Insurance company has examined Smt. Sushma Pandey (mother of deceased) as R3W1 who filed her evidence by way of affidavit as Ex.R3W1/A. She deposed that she and wife of deceased both have received Rs. 10 lakhs each towards the Term Insurance Policy on account of death of her son.
14. No evidence led by Respondent no. 1 and 2.
15. This Tribunal has heard the arguments advanced by Ld. counsel for the parties and perused the record. Written Submissions in form VIA filed on behalf of petitioners. Issuewise findings are as under :
ISSUE NO. 116. In the MACT cases, petitioners are required to prove the rash and negligent driving by the driver of the offending vehicle. In this case, eyewitness to the accident i.e. PW2 Nidhi Pandey has deposed regarding the manner of accident and deposed that accident occurred due to negligence of driver of offending vehicle. On the contrary, no evidence has been led by the respondent no.1. In Cholamandlam Insurance Company Ltd. vs. Kamlesh 2009 (3) ADDelhi 310, it was held that if driver of offending vehicle does not enter the witness box, an adverse inference can be drawn against him.
17. Chargesheet u/s 279/304A/337/338/427 IPC was filed against respondent No. 1. Certified copy of which is filed on record. In National Insurance Co. Vs. Pushpa Rana 2009 ACJ 287 Delhi, it was laid MACT No. 4549/16 Nidhi Singh Pandey & Ors. Vs. Nitin Garg & Ors. Page No. 7 of 20 down that completion of investigation and filing of charge sheet u/s 279/304A IPC are sufficient proof of negligence of the driver of the offending vehicle.
18. It is well settled that the proceedings before the Claims Tribunal are in the nature of inquiry and the finding of rash and negligent driving by driver of the offending vehicle is to be returned only at the touch stone of preponderance of probabilities. The factors noted above are sufficient to conclude that preponderance of probability is made out showing negligence of respondent no.1 in causing the accident.
19. In view of the evidence adduced by claimants, coupled with chargesheet against R1, issue no.1 is decided accordingly, in favour of the Petitioners.
ISSUE NO. 220. The age of the deceased at the time of accident was 25 years, his date of birth being 30.08.1991 as per High School Mark Sheet whereas the accident had taken place on 01.01.2016, and hence, multiplier of 18 will apply.
21. In evidence by way of affidavit PW2, wife of the deceased deposed that her husband was working with Adove Systems India Private Limited as member Technical Staff and getting a salary of Rs. 1,18,750/ per month. To prove the income and employment of the deceased, PW2 has examined Sh. Aditya Kumar (on behalf of employer of the deceased) as PW1 who proved the salary slips of MACT No. 4549/16 Nidhi Singh Pandey & Ors. Vs. Nitin Garg & Ors. Page No. 8 of 20 deceased Aman Pandey for the period March, 2015 to 04.09.2015 as Ex.PW1/3, appointment letter dated 03.02.2015, service certificate dated 04.09.2015 and relieving letter dated 04.09.2015 as Ex.PW1/4 (colly). He deposed that deceased Aman Pandey was reemployed vide appointment letter dated 23.09.2015 and the same is Ex.PW1/5. Deceased worked from 05.10.2015 to 05.01.2016 as per service certificate dated 05.01.2016 and same is Ex.PW1/6, his salary slips for the period 05.10.2015 to 05.01.2016 are ExPW1/7 (colly). Perusal of the salary slips for the month of November and December 2015 shows that the net salary of deceased was Rs. 98,593/. Since the LRs of deceased are able to prove the salary of deceased, same is considered as the monthly income of deceased.
22. Deceased has left behind his wife, parents and one sister. Mother of deceased deposed during her evidence that her husband (father of deceased) is also employed and working in police department and getting a salary of Rs. 45,000/. As the father of deceased is also employed and therefore, he as well as his daughter are not considered to be dependent on deceased and hence wife and mother of deceased are only 2 dependents. Therefore, the deduction will be 1/ 3rd.
23. In National Insurance Company Vs. Pranay Sethi & Ors. 2017 SCC online 1270, 40% increase towards future prospects was prescribed for those who are below the age of 40.
24. Therefore, the total financial loss for the family would be Rs.
98,593/ plus Rs. 39,437/ (40%) minus Rs. 46,010/ (1/3th deduction MACT No. 4549/16 Nidhi Singh Pandey & Ors. Vs. Nitin Garg & Ors. Page No. 9 of 20 towards personal expenses)= Rs. 92,020/ X 12 X 18 = Rs. 1,98,76,320/.
25. Additionally, the petitioners are also entitled for a sum of Rs.
40,000/ as loss of consortium and a sum of Rs.15,000 for cremation expenses & Rs.15,000/ towards loss of estate (total 70,000/). {See National Insurance Co. Ltd Vs. Pranay Sethi & Ors. (supra)}. Now compensation payable to the petitioners comes out to be (Rs. 1,98,76,320/ + 70,000/) = Rs. 1,99,46,320/.
26. Rs. 10 lakhs each has been received by wife and mother from the employer of the deceased through accidental policy. Hence the amount of group personal accident policy should be adjusted. Now the compensation is 1,99,46,320/ - 20,00,000/ = Rs. 1,79,46,320/.
27. Therefore, the total compensation payable to the petitioners would be Rs 1,79,46,320/ which shall be payable within 30 days with interest at the rate of 9% p.a. from the date of filing of petition which is 18.04.2016 till its realization which comes to Rs. 1,79,46,320 + Rs. 58,50,009/ =2,37,96,329/.
LIABILITY:
28. The next question is which respondent is liable to pay the compensation to the petitioner.
29. Since there is no statutory defence, the compensation will be payable by the insurance company of offending vehicle with interest @ MACT No. 4549/16 Nidhi Singh Pandey & Ors. Vs. Nitin Garg & Ors. Page No. 10 of 20 9% p.a. from the date of filing of petition i.e. 18.04.2016 till actual realization.
30. The award amount shall be deposited with State Bank of India, Saket Court Branch, New Delhi by way of RTGS/NEFT/IMPS in account of MACT FUND PARKING, A/c No. 35195787436, IFS Code SBIN0014244 and MICR code 110002342 under intimation to the Nazir along with calculation of interest and to the Counsel for the petitioners.
MODE OF DISBURSEMENT OF THE AWARD AMOUNT TO THE CLAIMANTS AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF THE 'MODIFIED CLAIM TRIBUNAL AGREED PROCEDURE' (MCTAP).
31. This court is in receipt of the orders dated 07.12.2018 passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in FAO no. 842/2003 titled as Rajesh Tyagi & Ors. Vs. Jaibir Singh & Ors whereby the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi has formulated MACAD(Motor Accident Claims Annunity Deposit Scheme) which has been made effective from 01.01.2019. The said orders dated 07.12.2018 also mentions that 21 banks including State Bank of India is one of such banks which are to adhere to MACAD. The State Bank of India, Saket Courts, Delhi is directed to disburse the amount in accordance with MACAD formulated by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi.
32. Keeping in view the entirety of the facts and circumstances involved in the present case and the abovesaid guidelines laid down by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi, the respondent no.3 is directed to MACT No. 4549/16 Nidhi Singh Pandey & Ors. Vs. Nitin Garg & Ors. Page No. 11 of 20 deposit the amount of Rs. 2,37,96,329/ as stated herein above with SBI, Saket Courts, Delhi. The amount of Rs. 1,19,96,329/ shall be awarded to the petitioner no.1 i.e. the wife of the out of which Rs. 1,10,00,000/ shall be kept in 440 FDRs of Rs. 25,000/ on a monthly basis with cumulative interest. Remaining amount of Rs. 9,96,329/ be released to the petitioner in her bank account.
33. Rs. 1,18,00,000/ be awarded to petitioner no. 2 (mother of deceased). Rs. 1,10,00,000/ shall be kept in 440 FDRs of Rs. 25,000/ on a monthly basis with cumulative interest. Remaining amount of Rs. 8,00,000/ be released to the petitioner no. 2 in her bank account.
34. The following conditions are to be adhered to by SBI, Saket Courts, Delhi with respect to the fixed deposits:
(a) The Bank shall not permit any joint name(s) to be added in the savings bank account or fixed deposit accounts of the claimant(s) i.e. the savings bank account(s) of the claimant(s) shall be an individual savings bank 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 monthly interest be credited by Electronic Clearing System (ECS) in the savings bank account of the claimant(s) near the place of their residence.
(d) The maturity amounts of the FDR(s) be credited by Electronic Clearing System (ECS) in the savings bank account of the claimant (s) near the place of their residence.
(e) No loan, advance, withdrawal or premature discharge be allowed on the fixed deposits without permission of the Court.
(f) The concerned bank shall not be issue any cheque book and/or debit card to claimant(s). However, in case the debit card and/or MACT No. 4549/16 Nidhi Singh Pandey & Ors. Vs. Nitin Garg & Ors. Page No. 12 of 20 cheque book have already been issued, bank shall cancel the same before the disbursement of the award amount. The bank shall debit card
(s) freeze the account of the claimant(s) so that no debit card be issued in respect of the account of the claimant(s) from any other branch of the bank.
(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.
(h) It is clarified that the endorsement made by the bank along with the duly signed and stamped by the bank official on the passbook(s) of the claimant(s) is sufficient compliance of clause (g) above.
35. In accordance with the orders dated 08.02.2019 passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in FAO no. 842/2003 in Rajesh Tyagi and others Vs. Jaibir Singh and others, Mr. Rajan Singh, Assistant General Manager has been appointed as Nodal Officer of SBI having Phone no. 02222741336/9414048606 and e mail ID [email protected]. In case of any assistance or non compliance, the aforesaid Nodal Officer may be contacted to. A copy of this order be sent by email to the aforesaid Nodal Officer of the aforesaid bank by the Ahlmad of the Court immediately in accordance with the directions of the Hon'ble High Court as contained in the orders dated 07.12.2018. The Nodal Officer of the bank shall ensure the disbursement of the award amount within three weeks of the receipt of the email as mentioned in the orders dated 07.12.2018 passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi.
DIRECTIONS TO THE PETITIONERS
36. Petitioners shall get opened their bank accounts in a bank near their place of residence and shall place on record a copy of the said MACT No. 4549/16 Nidhi Singh Pandey & Ors. Vs. Nitin Garg & Ors. Page No. 13 of 20 passbook with bank endorsement on it that the said account has been opened without cheque book and ATM card facility. The petitioners shall furnish information regarding the address of the bank/branch where the account has been opened as also the IFS code and MICR Code of the said branch. The petitioner shall also file their two photographs each, attested signatures, aadhar card and PAN card so as to facilitate the State Bank of India, Saket Court Branch to transfer the respective share of each petitioner in the said bank account. This order be complied with by the petitioners within two weeks from today.
FORM - IVA SUMMARY OF COMPUTATION OF AWARD IN DEATH CASES TO BE INCORPORATED IN THE AWARD
1. Date of accident 01.01.2016
2. Name of deceased Aman Pandey
3. Age of the deceased 25 years
4. Occupation of the deceased Software Engineer
5. Income of the deceased Rs. 98,593/ NAME, AGE AND RELATIONSHIP OF LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE OF DECEASED:
S No. Name Age Relation
(i) Nidhi 33 Years Wife of deceased
(ii) Sushma 50 years Mother of deceased
(iii) Gargeshwar 52 years Father of deceased
MACT No. 4549/16 Nidhi Singh Pandey & Ors. Vs. Nitin Garg & Ors. Page No. 14 of 20
(iv) Shivani Sister of deceased
COMPUTATION OF COMPENSATION:
S. No. Heads Awarded by the
Claims Tribunal
1 Income of the deceased per month Rs. 98,593/
2 AddFuture Prospects 40% (B) Rs. 39,437/
3 LessPersonal Expenses of the deceased Rs. 46,010/
1/3th (C)
4 Monthly loss of dependency [(A+B) C=D] Rs. 92,020/
5 Annual loss of dependency (D x 12) Rs. 11,04,240/
6 Multiplier (E) 18
7 Total loss of dependency (D x 12 x E = F) Rs. 1,98,76,320/
8 Compensation for loss of love and affection NIL
(H)
9 Compensation for loss of Consortium (I) Rs.40,000/
Compensation for loss of estate (J) Rs.15,000/
11 Compensation towards funeral expenses Rs.15,000/
(K)
12 TOTAL COMPENSATION Rs. 1,99,46,320/ Rs.
(F+G+H+I+J+K=L) (10 lakhs each has
been received by wife
and mother from the
employer of the
deceased through
accidental policy.
Hence the amount of
group personal
accident policy
should be adjusted).
Now the
compensation is
MACT No. 4549/16 Nidhi Singh Pandey & Ors. Vs. Nitin Garg & Ors. Page No. 15 of 20
1,99,46,320/ -
20,00,000/ = Rs.
1,79,46,320/.
13 RATE OF INTEREST AWARDED 9%
14 Interest amount upto the date of award Rs. 58,50,009/
15 Total amount including interest (L+M) Rs. 2,37,96,329/
16 Award amount released Rs. 17,96,329/
17 Award amount kept in FDRs Rs. 2,20,00,000/
18 Mode of disbursement of the award amount (I) Share of petitioner
to the petitioner (s). (Clause 29 no. 1 (wife of
deceased)
Compensation Amount
is Rs. 1,19,96,329/
Amount in FDR:
Out of Compensation
Amount, a sum of Rs.
2,10,00,000/ be kept in
440 FDRs each of Rs.
25,000/ on a monthly
basis. Balance amount
of Rs. 9,96,329/ be
released to petitioner
no. 1 in her bank
account near her place
of residence, details of
which are yet to be
provided.
(ii) Share of Petitioner
no. 2 (mother of
deceased)
Compensation Amount
of Rs. 1,18,00,000/ be
awarded to the mother
of petitioner out of
which Rs. 1,10,00,000/
shall be kept in 440
MACT No. 4549/16 Nidhi Singh Pandey & Ors. Vs. Nitin Garg & Ors. Page No. 16 of 20
FDRs of Rs. 25,000/
on a monthly basis.
Balance amount of Rs.
8,00,000/ be released
to the petitioner in her
bank account.
18 Next Date for compliance of the award 15.01.2020
(Clause 31)
Particulars of FormV are as under:
1. Date of the accident 01.01.2016
2. Date of intimation of the accident by the Accident took place
Investigating Officer to the Claims Tribunal. outside of Delhi
(Clause 2)
3. Date of intimation of the accident by the Accident took place
Investigation Officer to the Insurance outside of Delhi
Company. (Clause 2)
4. Date of filing of Report under Section 173 Accident took place
Cr.P.C. before the Metropolitan Magistrate. outside of Delhi
(Clause 10)
5. Date of filing of Detailed Accident Accident took place
Information Report (DAR) by the outside of Delhi
Investigating Officer before Claims Tribunal. (Clause 10)
6. Date of service of DAR on the Insurance Accident took place Company. (Clause 11) outside of Delhi
7. Date of service of DAR on the claimant(s). Accident took place (Clause 11) outside of Delhi
8. Whether DAR was complete in all respects? Accident took place (Clause 16) outside of Delhi
9. If not, state deficiencies in the DAR Accident took place outside of Delhi MACT No. 4549/16 Nidhi Singh Pandey & Ors. Vs. Nitin Garg & Ors. Page No. 17 of 20
10. Whether the police has verified the Accident took place documents filed with DAR? (Clause 4) outside of Delhi
11. Whether there was any delay or deficiency Accident took place on the part of the Investigating Officer? If so, outside of Delhi whether any action / direction warranted.
12. Date of appointment of the Designated NA Officer by the Insurance Company.
(Clause19)
13. Name, address and contact number of the NA Designated Officer of the Insurance Company. (Clause 19)
14. Whether the Designated Officer of the NA Insurance Company submitted his report within 30 days of the DAR? (Clause 21)
15. Whether the Insurance Company admitted No the liability?, if so, whether the Designated Officer of the Insurance Company fairly computed the compensation in accordance with law (Clause 92).
16. Whether, there was any delay or deficiency NA on the part of the Designated Officer of the Insurance Company? If so, whether any action / direction warranted?
17. Date of response of the claimants to the Not applicable offer of the Insurance Company. (Clause 23)
18. Date of award. 05.12.2019
19. Whether the award was passed with the No consent of the parties? (Clause 22)
20. Whether the claimant (s) were directed to Yes open savings bank account (s) near their place of residence? (Clause18)
21. Date of order by which claimant (s) were 01.02.2018 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 to issue any MACT No. 4549/16 Nidhi Singh Pandey & Ors. Vs. Nitin Garg & Ors. Page No. 18 of 20 cheque book / debit card to the claimant (s) and make an endorsement to this effect on the passbook (s) (Clause18 ).
22. Date on which the claimant (s) produced the passbook of their saving bank account near the place of their residence, along with the Not produced yet endorsement, PAN Card and Aadhar Card.
(Clause 18)
23. Permanent residential address of the C5, Suraksha claimant (s)? (Clause 27) Appartment Indira Puram, Abhay KhandGhaziabad ,Uttar Pradesh.
Permanent R/o Plat no. 4, Shiv Vihar, Pankey Road, Kalyanpu District Kanpur, Uttar Pradesh.
24. Details of saving bank account (s) of the Not produced claimant (s) and the address of the bank with IFS Code. (Clause 27)
25. Whether the claimant (s) saving bank Not known account (s) is near his place of residence?
(Clause 27)
26. Whether the claimant (s) were examined at Yes the time of passing of the award to ascertain his / their financial condition? (Clause 27)
27. Account Number, MICR Number, IFS Code, State Bank of India, Name and Branch of the Bank of the Claims Saket Court Tribunal in which the award amount is to be A/C No. 35195787436 deposited/transferred. IFS Code SBIN0014244 MICR No.110002342
37. Copy of this award be given to the parties free of cost. The copy of MACT No. 4549/16 Nidhi Singh Pandey & Ors. Vs. Nitin Garg & Ors. Page No. 19 of 20 award be sent to the DLSA, SE and Ld. Metropolitan Magistrate.
38. Put up on 15.01.2020 for providing bank details of petitioners as well as for compliance. Digitally signed by DR DR HARDEEP KAUR HARDEEP Date:
KAUR 2019.12.12
(Typed to the dictation directly, 15:22:45
corrected and pronounced +0530
in the open Court on 05.12.2019) (Dr. Hardeep Kaur)
POMACT/(South East District)
Saket, New Delhi
MACT No. 4549/16 Nidhi Singh Pandey & Ors. Vs. Nitin Garg & Ors. Page No. 20 of 20