Delhi District Court
Anandi Devi & Ors. vs . Harvinder Singh & Anr. on 29 April, 2019
1
IN THE COURT OF SH. PARAMJIT SINGH PO : MACT (SOUTHWEST
DISTRICT), DWARKA COURTS: NEW DELHI
MACP No. 78/2016
Anandi Devi & Ors. Vs. Harvinder Singh & Anr.
CNR No. DLSW010000282013
1. Anandi Devi
W/o Late Sh. Bhagat Singh
2. Namita Rawat
D/o Late Sh. Bhagat Singh
3. Ranjeeta Rawat
D/o Late Sh. Bhagat Singh
4. Sandhya Rawat
D/o Late Sh. Bhagat Singh
(Petitioner nos. 2 to 4 being minors through their
mother/ natural guardian Anandi Devi)
All Residents of
H. No. 563, Gali No. 21,
Sadh Nagar, Palam,
New Delhi.
5. Sushila Devi
W/o Sh. Khushal Singh
R/o Village Khera,
PO Baboli Khal
District Pauri Garhwal,
Uttrakhand ... Petitioners
Vs.
1. Harvinder Singh (Driver)
S/o Sh. Karnail Singh
MACP No. 78/2016 Anandi Devi & Ors. Vs. Harvinder Singh & Anr. 1/24
2
R/o Ishpur, PS Najinabad
District Bijnaur, UP
2. Uttrakhand Transport Corporation (Owner)
Through its Manager,
11, Indira Nagar,
Dehradun, Uttrakhand ... Respondents
Date of institution of the case 08.11.2013
Date on which, judgment have been reserved 02.04.2019
Date of pronouncement of judgment 29.04.2019
JUDGMENT
The present claim petition u/s 166 & 140 of Motor Vehicle Act for grant of compensation in respect of death of deceasedBhagat Singh Rawat in a road traffic accident dated 09.06.2013 has been filed on behalf of petitionersAnandi Devi & Ors. against respondents Harvinder Singh & Anr.
2. Brief facts as made out from the petition are that on 09.06.2013 at about 4:20 PM, Bhagat Singh ( since deceased ) alongwith his wife Anandi Devi and daughter was coming from Kotdwar to Delhi in bus bearing no. UA 07M 7791 which was being driven by its driver i.e. respondent no. 1 at a very fast speed and in a rash and negligent manner and the passengers, including the deceased and petitioners requested the driver to drive the bus at slow speed but he did not pay any heed to them. It is further stated that when bus reached near Meerut bypass, Meerut UP it met with an accident due to sole negligence on the part of its driver and as a result of the same, many passengers of the bus received grievous injuries and Bhagat Singh received fatal injuries and died and case in this regard was registered vide FIR No. MACP No. 78/2016 Anandi Devi & Ors. Vs. Harvinder Singh & Anr. 2/24 3 343/13 u/s 279/304A IPC at PS : Kankarhera District : Meerut. It is stated that the deceased was aged about 38 years and was earning Rs.30,000/pm at the time of accident. It is also stated that the petitioners have suffered great pain, agony, mental torture and shock due to death of deceased and it has been prayed 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 favour of the petitioners and against the respondents.
3. Reply to the present claim petition has been filed on behalf of R1 Harvinder Singh, wherein it has been stated that present case was gross misuse of process of law as the petitioners were trying to fetch money for no fault of the respondent. It is further stated that respondent no. 1 was a driver in Uttrakhand Transport Corporation for many years and was having a valid DL and he always drives the bus diligently and carefully. It is stated that on the day of incident, deceased was sitting on the window seat of the bus on the driver side and was taking out his head out of the window of the said bus and respondent no. 1 had warned him not to do so but despite warning, deceased continued to do the said negligent act and his head was hit by a tractor trolley and he died due to his own negligent act. It is also stated that respondent no. 1 was not liable to pay any compensation as the accident of deceased occurred due to his own negligent act.
Further, in reply on merits, the contents of para 1 to 8 and 11 to 13 of the petition are stated to be matter of record. All other averments made in the petition have been denied as incorrect and it has been prayed that the present petition filed on behalf of the petitioners may be dismissed.
4. Reply to the present claim petition has also been filed on behalf of R2/ MACP No. 78/2016 Anandi Devi & Ors. Vs. Harvinder Singh & Anr. 3/24 4 Uttrakhand Transport Corporation, wherein it has been stated that present petition was not maintainable as the petitioners have not approached the court with clean hands and have also misled the facts. It is further stated that incident was caused due to the negligence on the part of deceased, who was sitting on the window seat of the bus on the driver side and was taking out his head out of the window of the said bus and respondent no. 1 had warned him not to do so but despite warning, deceased continued to do the said negligent act and his head was hit by unknown vehicle and died on the spot.
Further, in reply on merits,, the contents of para 1, 2, 4 to 12, 14 to 18 of the petition are stated to be matter of record, All other averments made in the petition have been denied as incorrect and it has been prayed that the present petition filed on behalf of the petitioners may be dismissed with exemplory cost.
5. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed on 23.04.2014 by one of the Ld. Predecessors of this court.
ISSUES :
1. Whether deceased Bhagat Singh Rawat sustained fatal injuries on 09.06.2013 in an accident caused due to rash or negligent driving of vehicle no. UA 07M 7791, being driven by R1 and owned by R 2 ? ...OPP
2. Whether the petitioners are entitled to claim compensation, if so, what amount and from whom ? ...OPP
3. Relief.
6. In support of their case, petitioners have examined petitioner no. 1 Anandi Devi as PW1 and they have also examined PW2 Sanjay Goswami, Sr. MACP No. 78/2016 Anandi Devi & Ors. Vs. Harvinder Singh & Anr. 4/24 5 Manager, Walmart Corporate Office, Gurgaon and thereafter PE was closed on behalf of the petitioners.
7. In RE, respondents have examined R1W1 Harvinder Singh (driver of offending vehicle) and thereafter RE was closed on behalf of the respondents.
8. I have heard the arguments put forward by Ld. counsels for the petitioners and respondent no. 2 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 the respondents. I have also carefully perused the written submissions filed on behalf of the petitioners.
It is pertinent to mention here that arguments have not been addressed in this case on behalf of R1 Harvinder Singh (driver of the offending vehicle) despite opportunity being given.
9. The issuewise findings are as under :
10. ISSUE No. 1Whether deceased Bhagat Singh Rawat sustained fatal injuries on 09.06.2013 in an accident caused due to rash or negligent driving of vehicle no. UA 07M 7791, being driven by R1 and owned by R 2 ? ...OPP The onus to prove this issue was upon the petitioners and in order to discharge the said onus, the petitioners have examined PW1 Anandi Devi, who has filed her evidence by way of affidavit (Ex. PW1/A), wherein it has been stated that MACP No. 78/2016 Anandi Devi & Ors. Vs. Harvinder Singh & Anr. 5/24 6 on 09.06.2013 at about 4:20 PM, she alongwith her husband Bhagat Singh was coming from Kotdwar to Delhi in bus bearing no. UA 07M 7791 which was being driven by its driver i.e. respondent no. 1 at a very fast speed and in a rash and negligent manner and the passengers including she and her husband requested the driver to drive the bus at slow speed but he did not pay any heed to them. PW1 further deposed that when bus reached near Meerut bypass, Meerut UP, it met with an accident due to sole negligence on the part of its driver and as a result of the same, many passengers of the bus received grievous injuries and her husband received fatal injuries and died.
The important fact is that this witness i.e. PW1 Anandi Devi was cross examined on behalf of the respondents, but nothing material has come on record which could assail the credibility or trustworthiness of this witness.
In her cross examination by Ld counsel for R1, PW1 stated that many passengers were traveling in the offending vehicle and all passengers received injuries in the accident and her deceased husband received head injuries and was declared dead on the spot. PW1 denied the suggestion that at the time of accident, her husband was looking outside from the window and his head was outside and hit another vehicle. PW1 further denied the suggestion that at the time of accident, driver of offending vehicle was not negligent. PW1 also denied the suggestion that her husband received injuries due to his own negligent act or that she was deposing falsely. Further in her cross examination by Ld counsel for R2, PW1 denied the suggestion that she had not spent any money on her treatment or on the treatment of her husband or that she was deposing falsely. In these circumstances, nothing material has come on record which could shake the credibility of this witness qua her deposition regarding the manner in which the accident was caused in this case.
MACP No. 78/2016 Anandi Devi & Ors. Vs. Harvinder Singh & Anr. 6/24 7 Further, in regard to Issue no.1, respondents have also examined R1W1 Harvinder Singh (R1/driver of offending vehicle bearing UA 07M 7791), who has filed his evidence by way of affidavit Ex. R1W1/A and therein, it has been stated that he was a driver in Uttrakhand Transport Corporation for many years and was having a valid DL and he always drives the bus diligently and carefully. R1W1 further deposed that on the day of incident, deceased was sitting on the window seat of the bus on the driver side and was taking out his head out of the window of the said bus and he had warned him not to do so but despite warning, deceased continued to do the said negligent act and his head was hit by a tractor trolley and died due to his own negligent act, however the testimony of this witness i.e. R1W1 is not of much use to the respondents in the instant case as in his cross examination, R1W1 Harvinder Singh (R1/driver of offending vehicle) admitted that on the date of accident, he was driving bus bearing no. UA 07M 7791. R1W1 further admitted that after the accident, he was arrested by the police officials and thereafter released on bail. R1W1 admitted that charge had been framed against him and he was facing the trial. R1W1 also stated that he has not complained to any higher authority regarding lodging of a false case against him and he had also not noted down the registration number of tractor trolley.
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 Bhagat Singh Rawat sustained fatal injuries and died in a motor vehicle accident dated 09.06.2013 due to rash or negligent driving of offending vehicle bearing UA 07M 7791, which was being driven by R1 Harvinder Singhr and owned by R2 Uttrakhand Transport Corporation at the time of accident.
Accordingly, issue no.1 is decided in favour of the petitioners and against the respondents.
MACP No. 78/2016 Anandi Devi & Ors. Vs. Harvinder Singh & Anr. 7/24 8 11. ISSUE No. 2 Whether the petitioners are entitled to claim compensation, if so, what amount and from whom ? ...OPP The onus to prove this issue was upon the petitioners and in order to discharge the said onus the petitioners have examined PW1 Anandi Devi (petitioner no.1), who has filed her evidence by way of affidavit (Ex. PW1/A), wherein it has been stated that deceased Bhagat Singh Rawat was her husband and was aged about 38 years at the time of accident. PW1 further deposed that her husband met with an accident on 09.06.2013 due to rash and negligent driving of respondent no. 1, who was driving the offending vehicle bearing no. UA 07M 7791. PW1 deposed that at the time of accident, her husband was working as Asstt. Team Leader in Bharti Walmart Pvt. Ltd., Vasant Kunj, Delhi and was getting salary of Rs.30,000/pm. PW1 has also relied upon the documents Ex. PW1/1 to Ex. PW1/6.
Hence, in view of the above and in view of the material and evidence record, it is clear that deceasedBhagat Singh Rawat sustained fatal injuries and died in a motor vehicle accident dated 09.06.2013 due to rash or negligent driving of offending vehicle no. UA 07M 7791, which was being driven by R1 Harvinder Singh and owned by R2 Uttrakhand Transport Corporation at the time of accident and as such petitioners, being the LRs of the deceased Bhagat Singh Rawat, have become entitled to claim compensation for the death of said deceased in the above said accident.
Quantum of compensation payable to the petitioners/LRs of deceased Bhagat Singh Rawat is ascertained under the following heads :
12. AGE & MULTIPLIER As per his Aadhar Card and other documents / material on record, MACP No. 78/2016 Anandi Devi & Ors. Vs. Harvinder Singh & Anr. 8/24 9 deceased Bhagat Singh Rawat was aged about 38 years of age at the time of accident on 09.6.2013. Hence, the multiplier of '15' is taken in this case.
13. LOSS OF DEPENDENCY In the present case, in view of the material/evidence on record, it is evident that at the time of accident, the deceasedBhagat Singh Rawat was married and has left behind five LRs i.e. petitioner no.1 Smt. Anandi Devi ( wife), petitioner no.2 Namita Rawat (daughter), petitioner no.3 Ranjeeta Rawat (daughter), petitioner no.4 Sandhya Rawat (daughter) & petitioner no.5 Sushila Devi (mother). 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] , one fourth ( ¼ th ) 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 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, PW1 Smt. Anandi Devi (wife /LR of deceased) deposed that at the time of accident, her deceased husband was working as Assistant Team Leader with Bharti Walmart Pvt.Ltd , Vasant Kunj, New Delhi. In this regard the petitioners have also examined PW2 Sanjay Goswami, Sr. Manager, Bharti Walmart,Corporate Office, Gurgaon, who has produced the service record of deceased Bhagat Singh Rawat and he has also proved the salary slip of deceased Bhagat Singh Rawat for the month of May, 2013 as Ex. PW2/4, wherein the gross earning /salary of deceased Bhagat Singh Rawat has been mentioned as Rs. 18,062/ p.m. In these circumstances, the said salary i.e Rs. 18,062/ is taken as criteria for calculating the loss of dependency to the family in the present case.
MACP No. 78/2016 Anandi Devi & Ors. Vs. Harvinder Singh & Anr. 9/24 10 In view of the above, the loss of dependency to the family on account of the death of the deceased Bhagat Singh Rawat can be calculated as under:.
a) Income of the deceased : Rs. 18,062 /p.m
Bhagat Singh Rawat
b) 40% addition towards future prospects : Rs. 7,224/
c) 1/4 th deduction towards on personal
and living expenses of deceased. : Rs.6,321/
d) Monthly loss of dependency
(Rs. 18,062/ + Rs.7,224/ : Rs. 18,965/
Rs. 6,321/)
e) Annual loss of dependency to the
family due to death of deceased : Rs. 2,27,580/
(Rs.18,965 / x 12)
f) Total loss of dependency to the
family due to death of deceased
( Rs. 2,27,580 / x 15) : Rs.34,13,700 /
Hence, in view of the above, the total loss of dependency to the family on account of death of the deceased Bhagat Singh Rawat comes to Rs. 34,13,700 / and as such, the petitioners shall be entitled to the said amount i.e Rs. 34,13,700/ (Rupees Thirty Four Lacs, Thirteen Thousand, Seven Hundred only) as compensation under the head 'loss of dependency'.
14. 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 MACP No. 78/2016 Anandi Devi & Ors. Vs. Harvinder Singh & Anr. 10/24 11 'loss of estate'.
15. 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 petitioners towards ' funeral expenses'.
16. LOSS OF LOVE AND AFFECTION In the instant case, due to the death of deceased Bhagat Singh Rawat, his children i.e petitioner no.2 Namita Rawat ( daughter ), petitioner no.3 Ranjeeta Rawat (daughter), petitioner no.4 Sandhya Rawat (daughter) as well as his mother i.e petitioner no.5 Sushila Devi 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 Company Ltd Vs. Nanu Ram ( reported as 2018 SCC OnLine SC 1546), a sum of Rs.1,20,000/ (30,000 x 4) is awarded as compensation under the head loss of love and affection .
17. LOSS OF CONSORTIUM In terms of the law/guidelines laid down in the caseNational Insurance Company Ltd Vs. Pranay Sethi ( supra), a sum of Rs.40,000/ is awarded to the petitioner - Smt. Anandi Devi (wife of the deceased) towards 'loss of consortium'.
18. 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. 34,13,700 / MACP No. 78/2016 Anandi Devi & Ors. Vs. Harvinder Singh & Anr. 11/24 12
2. Loss of love and affection to children ( 30,000 x 4) Rs. 1,20,000/
3. Loss of consortium Rs. 40,000/
4. For funeral expenses Rs.15,000/
5. Loss of estate Rs.15,000/ TOTAL Rs. 36,03,700/rounded of as Rs. 36,04,000/
19. 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. 36,04,000/ from the date of filing of petition i.e. 08.11.2013 till realization.
20. LIABILITY The offending vehicle bearing no. UA07M7791 was being driven by respondent no.1Harvinder Singh and owned by respondent no.2/Uttrakhand Transport Corporation at the time of accident and as such, respondent no.1 Harvinder Singh and respondent no.2/ Uttrakhand Transport Corporation shall be jointly and severally liable to pay the awarded amount to the petitioners.
Hence, in view of the above, Issue No. 2 is decided accordingly.
21. RELIEF Thus in view of the above discussion & observations and having regard MACP No. 78/2016 Anandi Devi & Ors. Vs. Harvinder Singh & Anr. 12/24 13 to the fact and circumstances of the present case,an award for a sum of Rs. 36,04,000/ (Rupees Thirty Six Lacs, Four Thousand only) alongwith interest @ 9% p.a from the date of filing of the petition i.e 08.11.2013 till realization is passed in favour of the petitioners and against the respondents .
The abovesaid compensation amount shall be jointly and severally payable by the respondent no.1 Harvinder Singh and respondent no.2/ Uttrakhand Transport Corporation to the petitioners.
22. APPORTIONMENT The abovesaid award amount i.e Rs. 36,04,000/ (Rupees Thirty Six Lacs, Four Thousand only) shall be apportioned amongst the LRs of the deceased Bhagat Singh Rawat in the following manner with proportionate interest. S. No. Name of the petitioner/relation with deceased Amount
1. Petitioner no.1 Anandi Devi ( Wife ) Rs. 16,04,000/
2. Petitioner no.2 Namita Rawat ( minor daughter ) Rs. 6,00,000/
3. Petitioner no. 3 Ranjeeta Rawat ( minor daughter ) Rs. 6,00,000/
4. Petitioner no. 4 Sandya Rawat ( minor daughter ) Rs. 6,00,000/
5. Petitioner no.5 Sushila Devi ( mother ) Rs. 2,00,000/ Total Rs. 36,04,000 /
23. FORMIVA SUMMARY OF THE COMPUTATION OF AWARD AMOUNT IN DEATH CASES TO BE INCORPORATED IN THE AWARD
i) Date of accident : 09.6.2013
ii). Name of the deceased : Bhagat Singh Rawat
iii). Age of the deceased : 38 years ( at the time of accident) MACP No. 78/2016 Anandi Devi & Ors. Vs. Harvinder Singh & Anr. 13/24 14
iv). Occupation of the deceased: Private Job
v). Income of the deceased : Rs. 18,062/
vi). Name , age and relationship of legal representative of deceased S.No. Name Age Relation with deceased
(i) Anandi Devi 38 years Wife
(ii) Namita Rawat 15 years Minor daughter
(iii) Ranjeeta Rawat 12 years Minor daughter
(iv) Sandya Rawat 10 years Minor daughter
(v) Sushila Devi 80 years Mother Computation of Compensation S. No. Heads Awarded by the Claims Tribunal
7. Income of the deceased (A) Rs. 18,062/per month
8. AddFuture Prospects (B) Rs. 7,224/
9. LessPersonal expenses of the deceased (C) Rs. 6,321/
10. Monthly loss of dependency Rs. 18,965/ [ (A+B)C=D]
11. Annual Loss of dependency ( D x12) Rs 2,27,580/ 12. Multiplier (E) 15
13. Total loss of dependency (D x 12x E=F) Rs. 34,13,700/
14. Medical Expenses (G)
15. Compensation for loss of love and affection (H) Rs. 1,20,000/ (30,000 x 4)
16. Compensation for loss of consortium (I) Rs. 40,000/
17. Compensation for loss of estate (J) Rs. 15,000/
18. Compensation towards funeral expenses (K) Rs. 15,000/
19. TOTAL COMPENSATION Rs. 36,03,700/rounded of as (F+G+H+I+J+K=L) Rs. 36,04,000/
20. RATE OF INTEREST AWARDED MACP No. 78/2016 Anandi Devi & Ors. Vs. Harvinder Singh & Anr. 14/24 15
21. Interest amount up to the date of award (M) @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of petition i.e. 08.11.2013 till realization.
22. Total amount including interest ( L+M) Rs. 36,04,000/ + @9% per annum from the date of filing of petition i.e.08.11.2013 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
26. Next Date for compliance of the award. 31.5.2019 ( Clause 31)
24. In the instant case, the award amount shall be deposited /transferred by respondent no.1 Harvinder Singh and respondent no.2/ Uttrakhand Transport Corporation 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 .
Further, the statement of petitioner/LRs of the deceased Bhagat Singh Rawat 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 fact and circumstances of the present case, the award amount shall be distributed as follows: MACP No. 78/2016 Anandi Devi & Ors. Vs. Harvinder Singh & Anr. 15/24 16 S.No Name Status Amount of Release Amount of FDR Award Amount
1. Anandi Devi Wife Rs.16,04,000/ Rs. 2,04,000/ Rs. 14 lacs be kept in 140 FDRs of Rs. 10,000/each for the period from one month to 140 months in the name of petitioner no.1 Smt. Anandi Devi with cumulative interest.
2. Namita Rawat Minor Rs.6,00,000 / The entire amount of Rs.6 daughter lacs be kept in the form of FDR till petitioner no.2 Namita Rawat attains age of 18 years
3. Ranjeeta Rawat Minor Rs.6,00,000 / The entire amount of Rs.6 daughter lacs be kept in the form of FDR till petitioner no.2 Ranjeeta Rawat attains age of 18 years
4. Sandhya Rawat Minor Rs.6,00,000 / The entire amount of Rs.6 daughter lacs be kept in the form of FDR till petitioner no.2 Sandhya Rawat attains age of 18 years
5. Sushila Devi Mother Rs. 2,00,000 / Rs. 20,000/ Rs. 1.8 lacs be kept in 36 FDRs of Rs. 5,000/each for the period from one month to 36 months in the name of petitioner no.5 Smt. Sushila Devi with cumulative interest.
MACP No. 78/2016 Anandi Devi & Ors. Vs. Harvinder Singh & Anr. 16/24 17 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.).
25. Petitioner no.1 Smt. Anandi Devi has produced the passbook of her SB Account No. 91882010021438 at Syndicate Bank, Sadh Nagar, Palam Colony, Delhi (IFSC Code: SYNB0009188), wherein it has been endorsed that "No ATM Card and Cheque Book issued to this account".
It is being requested on behalf of the petitioner no. 1 Smt. Anandi Devi that the abovesaid cash amount may be transferred to her aforesaid SB Account at Syndicate Bank, Sadh Nagar, Palam Colony, Delhi .
Accordingly, the Manager, State Bank of India, District Courts Complex, Sector10, Dwarka, New Delhi is directed to transfer the abovesaid cash amount to the abovesaid SB Account No. 91882010021438 of petitioner no.1 Smt. Anandi Devi at Syndicate Bank, Sadh Nagar, Palam Colony, Delhi 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, Syndicate Bank, Sadh Nagar, Palam Colony, Delhi is directed to release the abovesaid cash amount to petitioner no.1 Smt. Anandi Devi, 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.
MACP No. 78/2016 Anandi Devi & Ors. Vs. Harvinder Singh & Anr. 17/24 18 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 no. 1 Smt. Anandi Devi .
Manager of the concerned bank is directed not to permit premature encashment or loan qua the abovesaid FDRs to the petitioner no. 1 Smt. Anandi Devi without the prior permission of this court.
The abovesaid Syndicate Bank, Sadh Nagar, Palam Colony, Delhi is also directed not to issue any cheque book and/or debit card to the petitioner no. 1 Smt. Anandi Devi 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 no.1 Smt. Anandi Devi .
Syndicate Bank, Sadh Nagar, Palam Colony, Delhi shall permit account holder i.e petitioner no. 1 Smt. Anandi Devi to withdraw money from her above said saving bank account by means of a withdrawal form .
26. In the instant case, it is being stated that a Saving Bank Account No. 31973613034 in the name of minor petitioner no.2 Namita Rawat has been opened at SBI, Mahavir Enclave, Palam, New Delhi (IFSC Code: SBIN0011564), wherein it has been endorsed that " No Cheque Book and Debit Card is issued in this account".
Accordingly, the Manager, State Bank of India, District Courts Complex, Sector10, Dwarka, New Delhi is directed to keep the abovesaid amount awarded to petitioner no.2 in the form of above mentioned FDR till petitioner no. 2 Namita Rawat attains the age of 18 years .
At the time of maturity, the fixed deposit amount shall be credited in the MACP No. 78/2016 Anandi Devi & Ors. Vs. Harvinder Singh & Anr. 18/24 19 aforesaid savings bank account of petitioner no.2.
The original FDR 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 no. 2 Namita Rawat.
Manager of the concerned bank is directed not to permit premature encashment or loan qua the abovesaid FDR to the petitioner no. 2 Namita Rawat without the prior permission of this court.
Further, the interest on the said FDRs shall be paid monthly by automatic credit /transfer of interest amount in the aforesaid SB Account of the petitioner no. 2 Namita Rawat .
The abovesaid SBI, Mahavir Enclave, Palam, New Delhi, is also directed not to issue any cheque book and/or debit card to the petitioner no. 2 Namita Rawat 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 no. 2Namita Rawat .
SBI, Mahavir Enclave, Palam, New Delhi, shall permit account holder i.e petitioner no. 2 Namita Rawat to withdraw money from her abovesaid saving bank account by means of a withdrawal form .
27. In the instant case, it is being stated that a Saving Bank Account No. 31973625812 in the name of minor petitioner no.3 Ranjeeta Rawat has been opened at SBI, Mahavir Enclave, Palam, New Delhi (IFSC Code: SBIN0011564), wherein it has been endorsed that " No Cheque Book and Debit Card is issued in this account".
Accordingly, the Manager, State Bank of India, District Courts Complex, MACP No. 78/2016 Anandi Devi & Ors. Vs. Harvinder Singh & Anr. 19/24 20 Sector10, Dwarka, New Delhi is directed to keep the abovesaid amount awarded to petitioner no.3 in the form of above mentioned FDR till petitioner no. 3 Ranjeeta Rawat attains the age of 18 years .
At the time of maturity, the fixed deposit amount shall be credited in the aforesaid savings bank account of petitioner no.3.
The original FDR 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 no. 3 Ranjeeta Rawat.
Manager of the concerned bank is directed not to permit premature encashment or loan qua the abovesaid FDR to the petitioner no. 3 Ranjeeta Rawat without the prior permission of this court.
Further, the interest on the said FDRs shall be paid monthly by automatic credit /transfer of interest amount in the aforesaid SB Account of the petitioner no. 3 Ranjeeta Rawat .
The abovesaid SBI, Mahavir Enclave, Palam, New Delhi, is also directed not to issue any cheque book and/or debit card to the petitioner no. 3 Ranjeeta Rawat 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 no. 3 Ranjeeta Rawat .
SBI, Mahavir Enclave, Palam, New Delhi, shall permit account holder i.e petitioner no. 3 Ranjeeta Rawat to withdraw money from her abovesaid saving bank account by means of a withdrawal form .
28. In the instant case, it is being stated that a Saving Bank Account No. 33127975550 in the name of minor petitioner no.4 Sandhya Rawat has been MACP No. 78/2016 Anandi Devi & Ors. Vs. Harvinder Singh & Anr. 20/24 21 opened at SBI, Mahavir Enclave, Palam, New Delhi (IFSC Code: SBIN0011564), wherein it has been endorsed that " No Cheque Book and Debit Card is issued in this account".
Accordingly, the Manager, State Bank of India, District Courts Complex, Sector10, Dwarka, New Delhi is directed to keep the abovesaid amount awarded to petitioner no.4 in the form of above mentioned FDR till petitioner no. 4 Sandhya Rawat attains the age of 18 years .
At the time of maturity, the fixed deposit amount shall be credited in the aforesaid savings bank account of petitioner no.4.
The original FDR 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 no. 4 Sandhya Rawat.
Manager of the concerned bank is directed not to permit premature encashment or loan qua the abovesaid FDR to the petitioner no. 4 Sandhya Rawat without the prior permission of this court.
Further, the interest on the said FDRs shall be paid monthly by automatic credit /transfer of interest amount in the aforesaid SB Account of the petitioner no. 4 Sandhya Rawat .
The abovesaid SBI, Mahavir Enclave, Palam, New Delhi, is also directed not to issue any cheque book and/or debit card to the petitioner no. 4 Sandhya Rawat 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 no. 4 Ranjeeta Rawat .
SBI, Mahavir Enclave, Palam, New Delhi, shall permit account holder i.e petitioner no. 4 Sandhya Rawat to withdraw money from her abovesaid saving MACP No. 78/2016 Anandi Devi & Ors. Vs. Harvinder Singh & Anr. 21/24 22 bank account by means of a withdrawal form .
29. Petitioner no.5 Smt. Sushila Devi has produced the passbook of her SB Account No.2871000100062085 at Punjab National Bank, Chailusain, Uttrakhand (IFSC Code: PUNB0287100), wherein it has been endorsed that " No Cheque Book and Debit Card issued to this account".
It is being requested on behalf of the petitioner no. 5 Smt. Sushila Devi that the abovesaid cash amount may be transferred to her aforesaid SB Account at Punjab National Bank, Chailusain, Uttrakhand .
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. 2871000100062085 of petitioner no. 5 Smt. Sushila Devi at Punjab National Bank, Chailusain, Uttrakhand 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, Punjab National Bank, Chailusain, Uttrakhand is directed to release the abovesaid cash amount to petitioner no.5 Smt. Sushila Devi , 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.
All the original FDRs shall be retained by the concerned bank, however, the statement containing FDR number, amount, date of maturity and maturity amount MACP No. 78/2016 Anandi Devi & Ors. Vs. Harvinder Singh & Anr. 22/24 23 shall be provided to petitioner no. 5 Smt. Sushila Devi .
Manager of the concerned bank is directed not to permit premature encashment or loan qua the abovesaid FDRs to the petitioner no. 5 Smt. Sushila Devi without the prior permission of this court.
The abovesaid Punjab National Bank, Chailusain, Uttrakhand is also directed not to issue any cheque book and/or debit card to the petitioner no. 5 Smt. Sushila Devi 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 no. 5 Smt. Sushila Devi .
Punjab National Bank, Chailusain, Uttrakhand shall permit account holder i.e petitioner no. 5 Smt. Sushila Devi to withdraw money from her above said saving bank account by means of a withdrawal form .
30. The respondent nos. 1&2 shall inform the petitioners as well as their counsel through registered post that the award amount is being transferred/ deposited so as to facilitate the petitioners 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, Syndicate Bank, Sadh Nagar, Palam Colony, Delhi, Manager,SBI, Mahavir Enclave, Palam, New Delhi and Manager, Punjab National Bank, Chailusain, Uttrakhand, 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.
MACP No. 78/2016 Anandi Devi & Ors. Vs. Harvinder Singh & Anr. 23/24 24 Certified copy of this award be given ''Dasti' to the petitioners/ their counsel and Ld. Counsel for the respondents.
Certified copy of this award be also sent to the concerned Ld. Metropolitan Magistrate and Delhi State Legal Services Authority.
Ahlmad is directed to prepare a separate misc. file and put up the same for filing of the compliance report on 31.5.2019.
File be consigned to the record room.
(Announced in the open (Paramjit Singh)
Court on 29.4.2019) PO, MACT (SouthWest District)
Dwarka Courts, New Delhi
29.4.2019
Digitally
signed by
PARAMJIT
PARAMJIT SINGH
SINGH Date:
2019.04.29
15:38:31
+0530
MACP No. 78/2016 Anandi Devi & Ors. Vs. Harvinder Singh & Anr. 24/24