Delhi District Court
Kumari Pratima Pal Lrs Of ... vs Sachin ( New India Ass Co) on 30 July, 2025
DLCT010147552022
Presented on : 20-10-2022
Registered on : 22-10-2022
Decided on : 30-07-2025
Duration : 02 Years 09 Months
IN THE TRIBUNAL OF PRESIDING OFFICER-MACT-02,
CENTRAL, TIS HAZARI COURTS DELHI,
PRESIDED OVER BY DR. PANKAJ SHARMA
MACT No. 867/22
1. KUMARI PRATIMA PAL
W/o Late Sh. Sanket Kumar @ Sanket Pal
2. KRIYANSHI
D/o Late Sh. Sanket Kumar @ Sanket Pal
(Petitioner No. 2 is minor through her mother & natural
guardian Kumari Pratima Pal/ Petitioner No.1)
Both R/o Village Paho, Khiro, Lalganj,
Rae Bareilli, UP-229209.
2nd Address:
R/o H.No.S-24, Rajdhani Park,
Nangloi, Gali No. 3, Ram Bhagat,
First Floor, Delhi-110041. .....Petitioners
VERSUS
1. SACHIN
S/o Sh. Sohan Pal
R/o Village Katha District Baghpat,
UP-250609.(Driver)
MACT No. 867/22 Kumari Pratima Pal & Anr. Vs. Sachin & Ors. Pages No. 1/26
Digitally signed by
PANKAJ PANKAJ SHARMA
SHARMA Date: 2025.07.30
12:55:43 +0530
2. SURENDER KUMAR
S/o Sh. Shiv Kumar
R/o VPO Manesar,
Haryana.
2nd Address:-
M-51/1, Gali No. 13,
Dharampuri, New Delhi-53. (Owner)
3. THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD.
487, Second Floor, Zulfe Bengal,GT Road,
Dilshad Garden, Delhi-1100095.(Insurer)
(Through Ld. Counsel Ms. Damanjit Kaur )
4. KUSUM LATA
W/o Sh. Nageshvar
R/o Village Paho, Khiro, Lalganj,
Rae Bareilli, UP-229209.
5. NAGESHVAR
S/o Sh. Budhai
R/o Village Paho, Khiro, Lalganj,
Rae Bareilli, UP-229209.
6. SANDEEP
S/o Sh. Nageshvr
R/o Village Paho, Khiro, Lalganj,
Rae Bareilli, UP-229209.
7. NAINSI PAL
D/o Sh. Nageshvar
R/o Village Paho, Khiro, Lalganj,
Rae Bareilli, UP-229209. .....Respondents
The particulars as per Form-XVII, Central Motor Vehicles (fifth Amendment) Rules, 2022 (Pl. see Rule 150A) are as under:-
1. Date of the accident 01/10/22
2. Date of filing of Form-I - First Accident Report N.A. (FAR) MACT No. 867/22 Kumari Pratima Pal & Anr. Vs. Sachin & Ors. Pages No. 2/26 Digitally signed by PANKAJ PANKAJ SHARMA SHARMA Date: 2025.07.30 12:55:48 +0530
3. Date of delivery of Form-II to the victim(s) N.A.
4. Date of receipt of Form-III from the Driver N.A.
5. Date of receipt of Form-IV from the Owner N.A.
6. Date of filing of the Form-V-Interim Accident N.A. Report (IAR)
7. Date of receipt of Form-VIA and Form-VIB N.A. from the Victim(s)
8. Date of filing of Form-VII - Detailed Accident 13/03/23 Report (DAR)
9. Whether there was any delay or deficiency on N.A. the part of the Investigating Officer? If so, whether any action/ direction warranted?
10. Date of appointment of the Designated Officer N.A. by the Insurance Company
11. Whether the Designated Officer of the Insurance N.A. Company submitted his report within 30 days of the DAR?
12. Whether there was any delay or deficiency on N.A. the part of the Designated officer of the Insurance Company? If so, whether any action/ direction warranted?
13. Date of response of the claimant(s) to the offer N.A. of the Insurance Company.
14. Date of the award 30/07/25
15. Whether the claimant (s) was/were directed to Yes open savings bank account(s) near their place of residence?
16. Date of order by which claimant(s) was/were 01/05/24 directed to open savings bank account(s) near his place of residence and produce PAN Card and Adhaar 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.
17. Date on which the claimant(s) produced the N.A. passbook of their savings bank account near the place of their residence along with the endorsement, PAN Card and Adhaar Card?
MACT No. 867/22 Kumari Pratima Pal & Anr. Vs. Sachin & Ors. Pages No. 3/26 Digitally signed by PANKAJ PANKAJ SHARMA SHARMA Date: 2025.07.30 12:55:53 +0530
18. Permanent Residential Address of the R/o Village Claimant(s). Paho, Khiro, Lalganj, Rae Bareilli, UP-229209.
Second Address:-
R/o H.No.S-24, Rajdhani Park, Nangloi, Gali No. 3, Ram Bhagat, First Floor, Delhi-
110041
19. Whether the claimant(s) savings bank account(s) N.A. is near his place of residence?
20. Whether the claimant(s) was/were examined at N.A. the time of passing of the award to ascertain his/their financial condition?
AWARD/JUDGMENT FACTUAL POSITION & PLEADINGS
1. This DAR was filed on 13/03/2023 by Investigation Officer (IO) before this Tribunal in the presence of the parties. The DAR was prepared by IO in respect of a motor vehicular accident dated 01/10/2022 which occurred at about 12.05 A.M. at a spot situated ahead of Wazirabad Flyover in front of Gandhi Vihar Outer Ring Road, Delhi falling within the jurisdiction of PS Waziraabd in which one Sh. Sanket Kumar @ Sanket Pal S/o MACT No. 867/22 Kumari Pratima Pal & Anr. Vs. Sachin & Ors. Pages No. 4/26 Digitally signed PANKAJ by PANKAJ SHARMA SHARMA Date: 2025.07.30 12:55:57 +0530 Sh. Nageshwar Pal (hereinafter referred to as "deceased") sustained fatal injuries. Prior to the filing of DAR, the present petition was filed on 22/10/2022 U/s 166 r/w Section 140 of M.V. Act seeking compensation to the tune of Rs.2,00,00,000/- under Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 in respect of the untimely death of the deceased in a motor vehicular accident. As per PW-2 (eye witness) that on 01/10/2022 at about 12:05 AM, he was going in TSR from Sarai Kale Khan to Pradhan Enclave, Burari, Delhi. He further stated that when he reached Wazirabad Flyover in front of Gandhi Vihar Outer Ring Road, Delhi he saw a Truck bearing registration no.HR-55N-1394 (as per DAR hereinafter referred to as "offending vehicle") going ahead of his TSR at a very high speed, driven mostly rashly and negligently, driven in a zig-zag manner and hit the motorcyclist which was going ahead of the Truck and as a result of which the motorcyclist fell down on the road and was crushed under the rear wheel of the Truck as a result of which the motorcyclist died on the spot due to injuries received in the accident. He further stated that some people from the public chased the Truck and stopped but the driver of the ran away leaving behind his Truck. He further stated that he called the police and the police arrived at the spot and his statement was recorded by the police. He further stated that the accident took place due to rash and negligent driving on the part of driver of Truck bearing registration no. HR-55N-1394. An FIR no. 777/22 PS Wazirabad was registered by the police U/s 279/304A IPC & 66 (1)/192A MV Act. R-1 is stated to be the driver of the offending vehicle. R-2 is stated to be the owner of the offending vehicle. R-3 is stated to be the insurer of the offending vehicle. R-4, R-5, R-6 and R-7 are the mother, father, brother and sister of MACT No. 867/22 Kumari Pratima Pal & Anr. Vs. Sachin & Ors. Pages No. 5/26 Digitally signed by PANKAJ PANKAJ SHARMA SHARMA Date:
2025.07.30 12:56:03 +0530 the deceased. R-3/insurance company was directed to file a legal offer/reasoned decision in response to the said DAR. R-1, R-2 R-4, R-5, R-6 and R-7 were also directed to file their Written Statements.
2. A joint written statement was filed by R-1 & R-2 in which they declined the contents of the DAR/petition. However, they further averred that at the relevant time the offending vehicle was covered by an insurance policy issued by R-3/ insurance company in favour of R-2 and therefore, the liability, if any, is to be discharged by R-3/ Insurance Company only.
3. R-3/ Insurance Company filed a Written Statement wherein it denied the contents of petition. It is averred it is not liable to pay any compensation as at the time of accident, the R-1 was not holding a valid permit. However, it is admitted that at the relevant time, the offending vehicle was covered by an insurance policy issued by itself.
4. A joint written statement was filed by R-4 and R-5 in which they averred they are the parents of the deceased and are entitled for compensation.
5. A joint written statement was filed by R-6 and R-7 in which they averred they are the brother and sister of the deceased and are entitled for compensation.
ISSUES
6. Vide order dated 01/05/2024, the following issues were framed by this Tribunal :-
MACT No. 867/22 Kumari Pratima Pal & Anr. Vs. Sachin & Ors. Pages No. 6/26 Digitally signed PANKAJ by PANKAJ SHARMA SHARMA Date: 2025.07.30 12:56:08 +0530
1. Whether the deceased Sh. Sanket Kumar suffered fatal injuries in an accident that took place on 01.10.2022 at about 00:05 AM involving vehicle bearing registration No. HR-55N-1394 driven by the Respondent No. 1 rashly and negligently, owned by the Respondent No. 2 and insured with the Respondent No. 3? OPP.
2. Whether the petitioners are entitled for compensation? If so, to what amount and from whom?
3.Relief.
PETITIONERS' EVIDENCE
7. In support of their contentions, the petitioners examined Petitioner no. 1 Sh. Kumari Pratima Pal wife of the deceased, as PW-1. PW-1, vide her affidavit Ex. PW-1/A, deposed that the deceased was her husband who lost his life on 01/10/2022 due to an accident dated 01/10/2022 involving the offending vehicle. She further deposed that the accident took place due to the rashness and negligence of R-1. He further deposed that the deceased was 30 years old and was doing private service and was earning Rs.60,000/- per month and that the petitioners, being the wife, daughter and parents of the deceased, were completely dependent on the earnings of the deceased. She relied upon following documents :-
"Photocopy of Aadhaar Card of PW-1 is Ex. PW-1/1; Photocopy of PAN Card of PW-1 is Ex. PW-1/2; Photocopy of Aadhaar Card of daughter Kriyanshi of PW-1 is Ex. PW-1/3;
Photocopy of Birth Certificate of daughter Kriyanshi of MACT No. 867/22 Kumari Pratima Pal & Anr. Vs. Sachin & Ors. Pages No. 7/26 Digitally signed by PANKAJ PANKAJ SHARMA SHARMA Date: 2025.07.30 12:56:12 +0530 PW-1 is Ex. PW-1/4;
Photocopy of Driving License of deceased is Ex. PW-1/5; Photocopy of PAN Card of deceased is Ex. PW-1/6; Photocopy of I-Card of deceased is Ex. PW-1/7; and Complete set of DAR is Ex. PW-1/8(colly).'' 7.1 PW-1 was cross-examined by Ld. Counsel for R-3/ Insurance Company. In her cross-examination she deposed that her husband used to earn Rs.60,000/- per month. She denied the suggestion that she has inflated the salary of her late husband in order to receive and enhance compensation. She further denied the suggestion that the alleged accident was caused by vehicle bearing no. HR-55N-1394.
7.2 Petitioners further examined one Sh. Mukund Pandey as PW-2 who is an eye witness of the accident. He deposed vide his affidavit Ex.PW2/A. He relied upon his Aadhar Card vide Ex.PW-2/1 (OSR). He deposed that on 01/10/2022 at about 12:05 AM, he was going in TSR from Sarai Kale Khan to Pradhan Enclave, Burari, Delhi. He further deposed that when he reached Wazirabad Flyover in front of Gandhi Vihar Outer Ring Road, Delhi he saw a Truck bearing registration no. HR-55N-1394 going ahead of his TSR at a very high speed, driven mostly rashly and negligently, driven in a zig-zag manner and hit the motorcyclist which was going ahead of the Truck and as a result of which the motorcyclist fell down on the road and was crushed under the rear wheel of the Truck as a result of which the motorcyclist died on the spot due to injuries received in the accident. He further deposed that some people from the public chased the Truck and stopped but the driver of the ran MACT No. 867/22 Kumari Pratima Pal & Anr. Vs. Sachin & Ors. Pages No. 8/26 Digitally signed PANKAJ by PANKAJ SHARMA SHARMA Date: 2025.07.30 12:56:16 +0530 away leaving behind his Truck. He further deposed that he called the police and the police arrived at the spot and his statement was recorded by the police. He further deposed that the accident took place due to rash and negligent driving on the part of driver of Truck bearing registration no. HR-55N-1394. He was cross- examined by Ld. Counsel for R-3/ Insurance Company. In his cross-examination he deposed that on the day of accident, he had came from Bareilly to Delhi to meet his sister in Burari. He further deposed that so far as he remembered that the accident happened in October, 2022. He further deposed that the spot was well lit and traffic movement was normal and he took the photographs of the Truck which he possesses in his mobile phone and he had not provided the photographs of the Truck to the IO as IO never asked for the same. He further deposed that the driver fled from the spot and he called the PCR and police reached within 15-20 minutes. He further deposed that the injured was taken to the hospital by the police. He denied the suggestion that he is deposing falsely.
7.3 Petitioners' evidence was then closed.
8. R-4 examined herself as R4W1 in her defence. She deposed vide her affidavit Ex.R4W-1/A. She was cross- examined by Ld. Counsel for petitioners as well as by Ld. Counsel for R-3/ Insurance Company. In her cross-examination she denied the suggestion hat she was not dependent upon her deceased son.
9. R-5 examined himself as R5W1 in his defence. He deposed vide his affidavit Ex.R5W-1/A. He was cross-examined MACT No. 867/22 Kumari Pratima Pal & Anr. Vs. Sachin & Ors. Pages No. 9/26 Digitally signed by PANKAJ PANKAJ SHARMA SHARMA Date: 2025.07.30 12:56:20 +0530 by Ld. Counsel for petitioners as well as by Ld. Counsel for R-3/ Insurance Company. In his cross-examination he deposed that he is a farmer and presently not doing any farming. He further deposed that he has 20 biswa which is almost 1 bigha land. He further deposed that he has given his land on patta for farming for which he receives yearly 300 kg of wheat. He further deposed that he is not able to make his ends meet. He denied the suggestion that he was not dependent upon his deceased son.
10. R-6 examined himself as R6W1 in his defence. He deposed vide his affidavit Ex.R6W-1/A. He was cross-examined by Ld. Counsel for petitioners as well as by Ld. Counsel for R-3/ Insurance Company. In his cross-examination he denied the suggestion that he was not dependent upon his deceased brother.
11. R-7 examined herself as R7W1 in her defence. She deposed vide her affidavit Ex.R7W-1/A. She was cross- examined by Ld. Counsel for petitioners as well as by Ld. Counsel for R-3/ Insurance Company. In her cross-examination she deposed that she is not employed anywhere. She denied the suggestion that she was not dependent upon her deceased brother.
FINDINGS
12. Oral submissions were advanced by Ld. Counsel for the parties.
13. I have perused the record and my issue wise findings are as under:-
MACT No. 867/22 Kumari Pratima Pal & Anr. Vs. Sachin & Ors. Pages No. 10/26 Digitally signed by PANKAJ PANKAJ SHARMA SHARMA Date: 2025.07.30 12:56:24 +0530 ISSUE NO. 1 "Whether the deceased Sh. Sanket Kumar suffered fatal injuries in an accident that took place on 01.10.2022 at about 00:05 AM involving vehicle bearing registration No. HR-55N-1394 driven by the Respondent No. 1 rashly and negligently, owned by the Respondent No. 2 and insured with the respondent no. 3? OPP.''
14. It is well settled that the procedure followed for proceedings conducted by an accident tribunal is similar to that followed by a civil court and in civil matters the facts are required to be established by preponderance of probabilities only and not by strict rules of evidence or beyond reasonable doubts as are required in a criminal prosecution. The burden of proof in a civil case is never as heavy as that is required in a criminal case, but in a claim petition under the Motor Vehicles Act, this burden is infact even lesser than that in a civil case.
Reference in this regard can be made to the propositions of law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Bimla Devi and others Vs. Himachal Road Transport Corporation and others, reported in (2009) 13 SC 530, which were reiterated in the subsequent judgment in the case of Parmeshwari Vs. Amir Chand and others 2011 (1) SCR 1096 (Civil Appeal No.1082 of 2011) and also recently in another case Mangla Ram Vs. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. & Ors., 2018 Law Suit (SC) 303.
15. In order to prove the present issue, the petitioners have examined Sh. Mukund Pandey as PW-2 who is an eye witness of the accident. PW-2 deposed during the course of MACT No. 867/22 Kumari Pratima Pal & Anr. Vs. Sachin & Ors. Pages No. 11/26 Digitally signed by PANKAJ PANKAJ SHARMA SHARMA Date:
2025.07.30 12:56:27 +0530 present enquiry that the at the relevant date, time and place, he was going in TSR from Sarai Kale Khan to Pradhan Enclave, Burari, Delhi. He further deposed that when he reached Wazirabad Flyover in front of Gandhi Vihar Outer Ring Road, Delhi he saw a Truck bearing registration no. HR-55N-1394 going ahead of his TSR at a very high speed, driven mostly rashly and negligently, driven in a zig-zag manner and hit the motorcyclist which was going ahead of the Truck and as a result of which the motorcyclist fell down on the road and was crushed under the rear wheel of the Truck as a result of which the motorcyclist died on the spot due to injuries received in the accident. He further deposed that some people from the public chased the Truck and stopped but the driver of the ran away leaving behind his Truck. He further deposed that he called the police and the police arrived at the spot and his statement was recorded by the police. He further deposed that the accident took place due to rash and negligent driving on the part of driver of Truck bearing registration no. HR-55N-1394. He was cross- examined by Ld. Counsel for R-3/ Insurance Company but nothing favourable came to the respondents. In totality, the testimony of PW-2 seems reliable and worth acting upon. Since, PW-2 has categorically stated that the deceased Sh. Sanket Kumar died as driver of the offending vehicle hit the deceased due to his rash and negligent driving.
16. It is not denied that R-1 was charge-sheeted for the offences punishable under Sections U/s 279/304A IPC & 66 (1)/192A MV Act. in the above FIR, which in itself is a strong circumstance to support the above oral testimony of PW-2 and the case of petitioners on this issue. The copies of FIR, charge-
MACT No. 867/22 Kumari Pratima Pal & Anr. Vs. Sachin & Ors. Pages No. 12/26 Digitally signed by PANKAJ PANKAJ SHARMA SHARMA Date: 2025.07.30 12:56:31 +0530 sheet, site plan, Seizure Memo, Arrest Memo of R-1, Mechanical Inspection Report of the offending vehicle and Postmortem Report of deceased also corroborate the testimony of PW-2.
17. In view of the above, it could be safely assumed that at the relevant time the deceased had died due to the rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle being driven by R-1.
18. Having ruled so, this Tribunal now proceeds to assess the wrongful act, neglect or default of R-1, if any, in driving the offending vehicle at the relevant time. Admittedly, R-1 has not explained the circumstances under which the accident took place due to his rash and negligent driving. In the absence of any evidence regarding any mechanical defect in the offending vehicle or any material depicting any negligent/sudden act or omission on the part of the deceased, the only inference possible in the given facts and circumstances is that of neglect and default on the part of R-1 while driving the offending vehicle at the relevant time. In view of the above discussion, this Tribunal is constrained to hold R-1 guilty of gross neglect and default in driving the offending vehicle at the relevant time.
19. In view of the postmortem report pertaining to the deceased placed on record by the petitioners, no dispute is left regarding the death of the deceased on account of injuries sustained by him in the above accident.
20. In view of the above discussion, this Tribunal holds that the deceased lost his life on account of neglect and default MACT No. 867/22 Kumari Pratima Pal & Anr. Vs. Sachin & Ors. Pages No. 13/26 Digitally signed by PANKAJ PANKAJ SHARMA Date:
SHARMA 2025.07.30 12:56:35 +0530 of R-1 while driving the offending vehicle at the relevant time. This issue thus stands decided against the respondents and in favour of the petitioners.ISSUE NO. 2
"Whether the petitioners are entitled to any compensation, if so, to what amount and from whom?"
21. As this Tribunal has already held that R-1 was responsible for the death of the deceased due to his neglect and default in driving the offending vehicle at the relevant time, therefore, the petitioners have become entitled to be compensated for death of deceased in the above accident, but computation of compensation and liability to pay the same are required to be decided.
COMPENSATION
22. The compensation to which the petitioners are entitled shall be under the following heads:-
(i) LOSS OF DEPENDENCY
23. In this regard, the petitioners have examined Petitioner No. 1 as PW-1 who was the wife of deceased. PW-1 deposed that at the relevant time, the deceased was 30 years old, was doing private service and was earning more than Rs.60,000/- per month. However, there is no material available on record which could corroborate the claim of PW-1 as to the monthly earnings of the deceased. Therefore, in the facts and circumstances, it would be appropriate to assess the monthly income of the deceased as per the minimum wages payable to a MACT No. 867/22 Kumari Pratima Pal & Anr. Vs. Sachin & Ors. Pages No. 14/26 Digitally signed by PANKAJ PANKAJ SHARMA SHARMA Date:
2025.07.30 12:56:40 +0530 Matriculate-Person in Delhi (as deceased was working in the SIP SAI INFRA PROJECT which was situated in Delhi) at the time of accident i.e. 01/10/2022 were Rs.20,357/- per month.
24. Petitioners have claimed that the deceased was aged about 30 years at the time of his death. They have also placed on record a copy of high school marksheet of deceased, as per which the date of birth of deceased was 20/04/1992. The date of accident is 01/10/2022. Going by the said documents of the deceased, the age of deceased would be around 30 years as on the date of accident. Hence, in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Sarla Verma & Ors. Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation & Anr., (2009) 6 SCC 121, which has also been upheld by the Constitutional Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi & Ors. SLP (Civil) No. 25590 of 2014, decided on 31.10.2017, the multiplier of '17' is held applicable for calculating the loss of dependency caused to the petitioners on account of death of the deceased.
25. Coming to the dependency of deceased at the time of accident, it may be observed that the deceased is survived by his wife, one daughter, parents, brother and sister. However, Petitioners No. 1 (wife) and Petitioner No. 2 (minor daughter) as well as Respondent No. 4 (mother) are considered to be dependent upon the deceased only.
26. Irrespective of this, one third of the earnings of deceased shall be deducted towards his personal and living expenses in view of the law already discussed above. Further, since this Tribunal has assumed that the age of deceased was 30 MACT No. 867/22 Kumari Pratima Pal & Anr. Vs. Sachin & Ors. Pages No. 15/26 Digitally signed by PANKAJ PANKAJ SHARMA SHARMA Date:
2025.07.30 12:56:45 +0530 years at the time of accident., in view of the law laid down in the case of Pranay Sethi & Ors. (Supra), the petitioners are also held entitled to an addition of 40% of the above amount of his earnings towards future prospects.
27. Thus, the loss of dependency qua the deceased in the present case comes to Rs.38,75,973/- (Rs.20,357/- X 140/100 X 2/3 X 12X 17). This amount is awarded to the petitioners under this head.
(ii) COMPENSATION UNDER NON-PECUNIARY HEADS
28. In terms of propositions laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajwati @ Rajjo & Ors. Vs. United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Civil Appeal No. 8179/2022 decided on 09/12/2022, the petitioners are also held entitled to amounts of Rs. 20,000/- each under the heads of loss of estate and funeral expenses. Further, in view of subsequent judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of United India Insurance Company Ltd Vs Satinder Kaur & Ors MANU/HC/0500/2020 and The New India Assurance Company Ltd & Ors Vs Somwati & Ors MANU/HC/0674/2020, the petitioners are also entitled to compensation under the head "loss of consortium": -
Spousal Consortium : Rs. 48,000/- (Rs. 48,000/- X 1) Parental Consortium : Rs.48,000/- (Rs. 48,000/- X 1) Filial Consortium : Rs.96,000/- (Rs. 48,000/- X 2) Sister Consortium : Rs.48,000/- (Rs. 48,000/- X 1) Brother Consortium : Rs.48,000/- (Rs. 48,000/- X 1)
29. Hence, the petitioners are awarded a total sum of Rs.3,28,000/- (Rs.20,000/- + 20,000/- + Rs. 2,88,000/-) under MACT No. 867/22 Kumari Pratima Pal & Anr. Vs. Sachin & Ors. Pages No. 16/26 Digitally signed PANKAJ by PANKAJ SHARMA SHARMA Date: 2025.07.30 12:56:50 +0530 this head.
ISSUE NO.3/RELIEF
30. The petitioners are thus awarded a sum of Rs.42,03,973/- (Rupees Forty Two Lakhs Three Thousand Nine Hundred and Seventy Three Only) (Rs.38,75,973/- + Rs.3,88,000/-) along with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of Petition i.e. 22/10/2022. Since no interim compensation has been awarded, therefore no deduction is applicable.
RELEASE
31. Petitioners did not bother to appear before this Tribunal for recording their statements regarding financial needs and requirements.
31.1 Out of the awarded amount, Petitioner No. 1/ wife of the deceased is awarded a sum of Rs.36,00,000/- (Rupees Thirty Six Lakhs Only) and the said amount is directed to be kept with State Bank of India, Branch Tis Hazari Courts, New Delhi in MACAD in the form of 180 monthly fixed deposit receipts (FDRs) payable in equal amounts for a period of 1 to 180 months in succession, as per the scheme formulated by Central Motor Vehicles (fifth Amendment) Rules, 2022 [(Directions at serial no. 35, 36 of Procedure for Investigation of Motor Vehicle Accidents (under Rule 150A)]. The amount of FDRs on maturity would be released in her savings/MACT Claims SB Account as and when she furnishes the details of her bank account which is MACT No. 867/22 Kumari Pratima Pal & Anr. Vs. Sachin & Ors. Pages No. 17/26 Digitally signed PANKAJ by PANKAJ SHARMA SHARMA Date: 2025.07.30 12:56:55 +0530 near the place of her residence to the Bank Manager, State Bank of India, Tis Hazari Courts, New Delhi under intimation to the Civil Nazir of this Tribunal. The remaining amount of Rs.4,51,852/- (Rupees Four Lakhs Fifty One Thousand Eight Hundred and Fifty Two Only) is also directed to be released into her above said account, which can be withdrawn and utilized by the Petitioner no. 1/ wife of the deceased.
31.2 Rs.5,06,482/- each be kept in FDRs in the name of Petitioner No. 2/ daughter of the deceased till she attains majority with cumulative interest. On attaining majority, the bank shall release the interest portion to Petitioner No. 2 by transferring the same to her savings bank account as and when she furnishes the details of her bank account which is near the place of her residence to the Bank Manager, State Bank of India, Tis Hazari Courts, New Delhi under intimation to the Civil Nazir of this Tribunal and the principal amount of Rs.5,06,482/- each be kept in 50 FDRs of Rs. 10,000/- each for a period of 1 month to 50 months with cumulative interest in the name of Petitioner No. 2/ Daughter of the deceased.
31.3 Out of the awarded amount, Respondent No. 4/ mother of the deceased is awarded a sum of Rs.4,00,000/- (Rupees Four Lakhs Only) and the said amount is directed to be kept with State Bank of India, Branch Tis Hazari Courts, New Delhi in MACAD in the form of 20 monthly fixed deposit receipts (FDRs) payable in equal amounts for a period of 1 to 20 months in succession, as per the scheme formulated by Central Motor Vehicles (fifth Amendment) Rules, 2022 [(Directions at MACT No. 867/22 Kumari Pratima Pal & Anr. Vs. Sachin & Ors. Pages No. 18/26 Digitally signed by PANKAJ PANKAJ SHARMA SHARMA Date: 2025.07.30 12:57:00 +0530 serial no. 35, 36 of Procedure for Investigation of Motor Vehicle Accidents (under Rule 150A)]. The amount of FDRs on maturity would be released in her savings/MACT Claims SB Account as and when she furnishes the details of her bank account which is near the place of her residence to the Bank Manager, State Bank of India, Tis Hazari Courts, New Delhi under intimation to the Civil Nazir of this Tribunal. The remaining amount of Rs.1,06,482- (Rupees One Lakh Six Thousand Four Hundred and Eighty Two Only) is also directed to be released into her above said account, which can be withdrawn and utilized by the Respondent No.4/ mother of the deceased.
31.4 Out of the awarded amount, Respondents No. 5, 6 & 7 who are the father, brother and sister are awarded a sum of Rs.59,880/- each ( Rupees Fifty Nine Thousand Eight Hundred and Eighty Only). The entire awarded amount be released in their savings/MACT Claims SB Accounts as and when they furnish the details of their bank accounts which is near the place of their residence to the Bank Manager, State Bank of India, Tis Hazari Courts, New Delhi under intimation to the Civil Nazir of this Tribunal which can be withdrawn and utilized by the Respondents No. 5, 6 & 7 ( who are the father, brother and sister of the deceased) respectively.
32. The Bank(s) shall not permit any joint name(s) to be added in the savings bank account or fixed deposit accounts of the petitioner(s) i.e. the savings bank account(s) of the petitioner(s) shall be an individual savings bank account(s) and not a joint account(s). The original fixed deposit shall be retained MACT No. 867/22 Kumari Pratima Pal & Anr. Vs. Sachin & Ors. Pages No. 19/26 Digitally signed PANKAJ by PANKAJ SHARMA SHARMA Date: 2025.07.30 12:57:08 +0530 by the SBI, Branch Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi in safe custody. However, the statement containing FDR number, FDR amount, date of maturity and maturity amount shall be furnished by the bank to the petitioner(s). The maturity amounts of the FDR(s) be credit by Electronic Clearing System (ECS) in the savings bank account of the petitioner(s) near the place of their residence. No loan, advance, withdrawal or pre-mature discharge be allowed on the fixed deposits without permission of this Tribunal.
LIABILITY
33. On the point of liability, Ld. Counsel for R-3/ Insurance Company has submitted that R-1 was plying the offending vehicle without any valid and effective permit which is a violation of contract of insurance policy and accordingly R-3/ Insurance Company seeks exoneration. The plea taken on behalf R-3/ Insurance Company that the offending vehicle which is insured but without permit is a fundamental breach of the terms and conditions of the insurance policy. The said contention is not acceptable. Further the judicial precedents filed are distinguishable from the facts of this case, therefore, the R-3/ Insurance Company is not entitled to complete exoneration, however, the R-3/ Insurance Company is granted recovery rights against R-2/ Owner only. Ordered accordingly.
34. R-3/ Insurance Company is directed to deposit the above award amount within 30 days from the date of this Award by way of NEFT or RTGS mode in the account of this Tribunal maintained with SBI, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi (account holder's MACT No. 867/22 Kumari Pratima Pal & Anr. Vs. Sachin & Ors. Pages No. 20/26 Digitally signed PANKAJ by PANKAJ SHARMA SHARMA Date: 2025.07.30 12:57:13 +0530 name-Motor Accident Claims Tribunal 02 Central, A/C No. 40743576901, IFSC Code SBIN0000726 under intimation to the petitioner and this Tribunal in terms of the format for remittance of compensation as provided in Divisional Manager Vs. Rajesh, 2016 SCC Online Mad. 1913 (and reiterated by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the orders dated 16.03.2021 and 16.11.2021 titled as Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India & Ors) along with interest @ 9% per annum, failing which it will be liable to pay interest at the rate of 12% per annum for the period of delay.
35. A digital copy of this award be forwarded to the parties free of cost. Ahlmad is directed to send the copy of the award to Ld. Metropolitan Magistrate concerned and Delhi Legal Services Authority in view of Central Motor Vehicles (fifth Amendment) Rules, 2022 [(Directions at serial nos. 39, 40 of Procedure for Investigation of Motor Vehicle Accidents (under Rule 150A)]. Further Nazir is directed to maintain the record in Form XVIII in view of Central Motor Vehicles (fifth Amendment) Rules, 2022 [(Directions at serial no. 41 of Procedure for Investigation of Motor Vehicle Accidents (under Rule 150A).
36. Ahlmad is directed to e-mail an authenticated copy of the award to the insurer as directed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in WP (Civil) No. 534/2020 titled as Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India & Ors. on 16.03.2021. Ahlmad shall also e-mail an authenticated MACT No. 867/22 Kumari Pratima Pal & Anr. Vs. Sachin & Ors. Pages No. 21/26 Digitally signed PANKAJ by PANKAJ SHARMA SHARMA 12:57:19 Date: 2025.07.30 +0530 copy of the award to Branch Manager, SBI, Tis Hazari Courts for information.
37. Ahlmad is further directed to comply with the directions passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in MAC APP No. 10/2021 titled as New India Assurance Company Ltd. Vs. Sangeeta Vaid & Ors., date of decision : 06.01.2021 regarding digitisation of the records.
File be consigned to Record Room.
A separate file be prepared for compliance report and Digitally signed by put up the same on 30.08.2025. PANKAJ PANKAJ SHARMA SHARMA Date: 2025.07.30 12:57:25 +0530 Announced in the open court (DR. PANKAJ SHARMA) On this 30.07.2025 Judge, MACT-02 (CENTRAL) Delhi/30/07/2025 FORM - XV, Central Motor Vehicles (fifth Amendment) Rules, 2022 (Pl. see Rule 150A) SUMMARY OF COMPUTATION OF AWARD AMOUNT IN DEATH CASES
1. Date of accident. : 01/10/2022
2. Name of the deceased : Sh. Sanket Kumar @ Sanket Pal
3. Age of the deceased : 30 years
4. Occupation of the deceased : Private Service
5. Income of the deceased : Assessed on the basis of minimum wages of a Matriculate-Person in Delhi at the relevant time
6. Name, age and relationship of legal representative of deceased:-
MACT No. 867/22 Kumari Pratima Pal & Anr. Vs. Sachin & Ors. Pages No. 22/26 Digitally signed by PANKAJ PANKAJ SHARMA SHARMA Date: 2025.07.30 12:57:28 +0530 S. No. Name Age Relation (1) Kumari Pratima Pal 31 Years Wife of the deceased (2) Kriyanshi 03 Years Daughter of the deceased (3) Kusum Lata 54 Years Mother of the deceased (4) Nageshvar 69 Years Father of the deceased (5) Sandeep 33 Years Brother of the deceased (6) Nainsi Pal 22 Years Sister of the deceased Computation of Compensation Sr. No. Heads Awarded by the Claims Tribunal
7. Monthly Income of the Rs.20,357/-
deceased(A) MACT No. 867/22 Kumari Pratima Pal & Anr. Vs. Sachin & Ors. Pages No. 23/26 Digitally signed PANKAJ by PANKAJ SHARMA SHARMA Date: 2025.07.30 12:57:33 +0530
8. Add-Future Prospects 40% (B)
9. Less-Personal expenses One third deduction has of the deceased(C) been done
10. Monthly loss of Rs.18,999.87/-
dependency[(A+B)-
C=D]
11. Annual loss of Rs.2,27,998.44/-
dependency (Dx12)
12. Multiplier(E) '17'
13. Total loss of dependency Rs.38,75,973/-
(Dx12xE= F)
14. Medical Expenses(G) NIL
15. Compensation for loss of Rs.2,88,000/-
consortium(H)
16. Compensation for loss of NIL love and affection (I)
17. Compensation for loss of Rs. 20,000/-
estate(J) MACT No. 867/22 Kumari Pratima Pal & Anr. Vs. Sachin & Ors. Pages No. 24/26 Digitally signed by PANKAJ PANKAJ SHARMA Date:
SHARMA 2025.07.30 12:57:37 +0530
18. Compensation towards Rs. 20,000/-
funeral expenses(K)
19.
TOTAL Rs.42,03,973/-
COMPENSATION(F+G
+H+I+J+K=L)
20.
RATE OF INTEREST 9%
AWARDED
21.
Interest amount up to the Rs.10,40,483/- (rounded date of award(M) off)
22. Total amount including Rs.52,44,456/- interest(L + M) P-1 : Rs.4,51,852/- (wife)
23. Award amount released R-4 : Rs.1,06,482/-(Mother) R-5 :Rs.59,880/- (Father) R-6 :Rs.59,880/-(Brother) R-7:Rs.59,880/- (Sister)
24.
Award amount kept in As per award
FDRs
25.
Mode of disbursement of Mentioned in the award the award amount to the petitioner (s) MACT No. 867/22 Kumari Pratima Pal & Anr. Vs. Sachin & Ors. Pages No. 25/26 Digitally signed PANKAJ by PANKAJ SHARMA SHARMA Date: 2025.07.30 12:57:41 +0530
26. Next date for compliance 30/08/2025 of the award CONCLUSION:-
1. As per award dated 30.07.2025.
2. A separate file was ordered to be prepared by the Nazir with directions to put up the same on 30.08.2025.Digitally signed
PANKAJ by PANKAJ SHARMA SHARMA Date: 2025.07.30 12:57:45 +0530 (DR. PANKAJ SHARMA) PO MACT-02 (CENTRAL) DELHI/30.07.2025 MACT No. 867/22 Kumari Pratima Pal & Anr. Vs. Sachin & Ors. Pages No. 26/26 Digitally signed PANKAJ by PANKAJ SHARMA SHARMA Date: 2025.07.30 12:57:49 +0530