Delhi District Court
Yash Lata & Anr. vs . Ranbir Singh & Ors. on 10 October, 2018
1
IN THE COURT OF SH. PARAMJIT SINGH, PO : MACT (SOUTHWEST
DISTRICT), DWARKA COURTS: NEW DELHI
MACP No. : 2315/16
Yash Lata & Anr. Vs. Ranbir Singh & Ors.
CNR No.DLSW010084362016
FIR No 165/16
U/s279/338/304A IPC
PS: Najafgarh
1. Yash Lata
W/o Sh. Bhupender Kumar
R/o H. No. 28/27, Claiment Town,
Turner Road, Line No. 3, Dehradun, Uttrakhand
2. Bhupender Kumar
S/o Sh. Ram Kishan
R/o H. No. 28/27, Claiment Town,
Turner Road, Line No. 3, Dehradun,
Uttrakhand ... Petitioners
Vs
1. Sh. Ranbir Singh (Drivercumowner)
S/o Sh. Ram Chander
R/o VPO Rohana,
Tehsil Kharkhoda,
Sonipat, Haryana
2. Royal Sundrum General Insurance
Company Ltd. (Insurer)
Rider House, Ist Floor,
Plot No. 136, Sector 44,
Gurgaon, Haryana ... Respondents
(MACP Nos. 2315/16 & 2305/16 ) Yash Lata & Hitesh Panchal Vs. Ranbir Singh 1/35
2
MACP No. : 2305/16
Hitesh Vs. Ranbir Singh & Anr.
CNR No.DLSW010084852016
Sh. Hitesh Panchal
S/o Sh. Sunil Kumar
R/o: RZ 30, Dharam Pura1,
Najafgarh, New Delhi ... Petitioner
Vs.
1. Sh. Ranbir Singh (Driver)
S/o Sh.Ram Chander
R/o VPO Rohana,
Tehsil Kharkhoda,
Sonipat, Haryana
2. Royal Sundrum General Insurance
Company Ltd. (Insurer)
Rider House, Ist Floor,
Plot No. 136, Sector 44,
Gurgaon, Haryana ... Respondents
Date of institution of MACP No. 2315/16 05.11.2016
Date of institution of MACP No. 1356/16 05.11.2016
Date on which, judgment have been reserved11.09.2018
Date of pronouncement of judgment 10.10.2018
FORM V
COMPLIANCE OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE MODIFIED
CLAIMS TRIBUNAL AGREED PROCEDURE TO BE
MENTIONED IN THE AWARD
( In MACP NO. 2315
/16
Yash Lata
Vs.
Ranbir Singh
&
Anr.
)
1 Date of the accident 25.03.2016
2 Date of intimation of the accident by the Investigating Not clear from record
Officer to the Claims Tribunal ( Clause 2)
3 Date of intimation of the accident by the Investigating Not clear from record
(MACP Nos. 2315/16 & 2305/16 ) Yash Lata & Hitesh Panchal Vs. Ranbir Singh 2/35
3
Officer to the Insurance Company (Clause 2)
4 Date of filing of Report under Section 173 Cr. PC before Not clear from record
the Metropolitan Magistrate (Clause 10)
5 Date of filing of Detailed Accident Information Report 05.11.2016
(DAR) by the Investigating Officer before Claims
Tribunal. (Clause 10)
6 Date of service of DAR on the Insurance Company. 05.11.2016
(Clause 11)
7 Date of service of DAR on the claimant (s). (Clause 11) 05.11.2016
8 Whether DAR was complete in all respects? (Clause 16) Yes
9 If not, whether deficiencies in the DAR removed later on? N.A
10 Whether the police has verified the documents filed with Yes
DAR? (Clause 4)
11 Whether there was any delay or deficiency on the part of No
the Investigating Officer? If so, whether any action /
direction warranted?
12 Date of appointment of the Designated Officer by the Not clear from record
Insurance company ( Clause 20 )
13 Name, address and contact number of the Designated Not clear from record
Officer of the Insurance Company ( Clause 20 )
14 Whether the Designated Officer of the Insurance Yes
Company submitted his report within 30 days of the
DAR? ( Clause 22 )3
15 Whether the Insurance Company admitted the liability? If No
so, whether the Designated Officer of the Insurance
Company fairly computed the compensation in accordance
with law ( Clause 23 )
16 Whether there was any delay or deficiency on the part of No
the Designated Officer of the Insurance Company? If so,
whether any action / directions warranted?
17 Date of response of the claimant (s) to the offer of the N.A
Insurance Company. ( Clause 24)
18 Date of Award 10.10.2018
(MACP Nos. 2315/16 & 2305/16 ) Yash Lata & Hitesh Panchal Vs. Ranbir Singh 3/35
4
19 Whether the award was passed with the consent of the No.
parties? ( Clause 22)
20 Whether the claimant (s) were directed to open savings Yes
bank accounts (s) near their place of residence ? ( Clause
18)
21 Date of order by which claimant(s) were directed to open 13.02.2018
savings bank accounts(s) near his place of residence and
produce PAN Card and Adhaar Card and the direction tot
he bank not issue any cheque book/debit card to the
claimants (s) and make an endorsement to this effect on
the passbook(s) (Clause 18 )
22 Date on which the claimant(s) produced the passbook of 10.07.2018
their savings bank account near the place of their
residence alongwith the endorsement, PAN Card and
Adhaar Card? (Clause 18 )
23 Permanent Residential Address of the Claimant(s) R/o H. No. 28/27, Claiment
(Clause 27 ) Town, Turner Road, Line No.
3, Dehradun, Uttrakhand
24. Details of savings bank account(s) of the claimant(s) and Petitioner no. 1 Yash Lata
the address of the bank with IFSC Code( Clause 27) SB A/c no. 311301000002884
at Indian Overseas Bank,
Bharuwala Grant3113,
Dehradun (IFSC Code :
IOBA0003113 )
Petitioner no. 2 Bhupender
Kumar SB A/c no.
311301000002883 at Indian
Overseas Bank, Bharuwala
Grant3113, Dehradun (IFSC
Code : IOBA0003113 )
25 Whether the claimant(s) savings bank account(s) is near Yes
his place of residence ? (Clause 27)
26 Whether the claimant(s) were examined at the time of Yes
passing of the award to ascertain his/their financial
condition? ( Clause 27)
27 Account number, MICR number, IFSC Code, name and Account No. 37665510911 at
branch of the bank of the Claims Tribunal in which the SBI, District Court Complex,
award amount is to be deposited/transferred. Sector10, Dwarka New Delhi,
(IFSC Code SBIN0011566 and
MICR Code 110002483)
(MACP Nos. 2315/16 & 2305/16 ) Yash Lata & Hitesh Panchal Vs. Ranbir Singh 4/35
5
FORM V
COMPLIANCE OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE MODIFIED
CLAIMS TRIBUNAL AGREED PROCEDURE TO BE
MENTIONED IN THE AWARD
( In MACP NO. 2305/16 Hitesh Panchal Vs. Ranbir Singh & Anr.)
1 Date of the accident 25.03.2016
2 Date of intimation of the accident by the Investigating Not clear from record
Officer to the Claims Tribunal ( Clause 2)
3 Date of intimation of the accident by the Investigating Not clear from record
Officer to the Insurance Company (Clause 2)
4 Date of filing of Report under Section 173 Cr. PC before Not clear from record
the Metropolitan Magistrate (Clause 10)
5 Date of filing of Detailed Accident Information Report 05.11.2016
(DAR) by the Investigating Officer before Claims
Tribunal. (Clause 10)
6 Date of service of DAR on the Insurance Company. 05.11.2016
(Clause 11)
7 Date of service of DAR on the claimant (s). (Clause 11) 05.11.2016
8 Whether DAR was complete in all respects? (Clause 16) Yes
9 If not, whether deficiencies in the DAR removed later on? N.A
10 Whether the police has verified the documents filed with Yes
DAR? (Clause 4)
11 Whether there was any delay or deficiency on the part of No
the Investigating Officer? If so, whether any action /
direction warranted?
12 Date of appointment of the Designated Officer by the Not clear from record
Insurance company ( Clause 20 )
13 Name, address and contact number of the Designated Not clear from record
Officer of the Insurance Company ( Clause 20 )
14 Whether the Designated Officer of the Insurance Yes
Company submitted his report within 30 days of the
DAR? ( Clause 22 )
15 Whether the Insurance Company admitted the liability? If No
so, whether the Designated Officer of the Insurance
Company fairly computed the compensation in accordance
with law ( Clause 23 )
(MACP Nos. 2315/16 & 2305/16 ) Yash Lata & Hitesh Panchal Vs. Ranbir Singh 5/35
6
16 Whether there was any delay or deficiency on the part of No
the Designated Officer of the Insurance Company? If so,
whether any action / directions warranted?
17 Date of response of the claimant (s) to the offer of the N.A
Insurance Company. ( Clause 24)
18 Date of Award 10.10.2018
19 Whether the award was passed with the consent of the No.
parties? ( Clause 22)
20 Whether the claimant (s) were directed to open savings Yes
bank accounts (s) near their place of residence ? ( Clause
18)
21 Date of order by which claimant(s) were directed to open 13.02.2018
savings bank accounts(s) near his place of residence and
produce PAN Card and Adhaar Card and the direction tot
he bank not issue any cheque book/debit card to the
claimants (s) and make an endorsement to this effect on
the passbook(s) (Clause 18 )
22 Date on which the claimant(s) produced the passbook of 11.09.2018
their savings bank account near the place of their
residence alongwith the endorsement, PAN Card and
Adhaar Card? (Clause 18 )
23 Permanent Residential Address of the Claimant(s) R/o: RZ 30, Dharam Pura1,
(Clause 27 ) Najafgarh, New Delhi.
24. Details of savings bank account(s) of the claimant(s) and SB a/c no. 91082610002016 at
the address of the bank with IFSC Code( Clause 27) Syndicate Bank, Najafgarh
New Delhi (IFSC Code :
SYNB0009108)
25 Whether the claimant(s) savings bank account(s) is near Yes
his place of residence ? (Clause 27)
26 Whether the claimant(s) were examined at the time of Yes
passing of the award to ascertain his/their financial
condition? ( Clause 27)
27 Account number, MICR number, IFSC Code, name and Account No. 37665510911 at
branch of the bank of the Claims Tribunal in which the SBI, District Court Complex,
award amount is to be deposited/transferred. Sector10, Dwarka New Delhi,
(IFSC Code SBIN0011566 and
MICR Code 110002483)
(MACP Nos. 2315/16 & 2305/16 ) Yash Lata & Hitesh Panchal Vs. Ranbir Singh 6/35
7
JUDGMENT
The present case/DAR bearing (MACP No. 2315/16) has been filed in respect of death of Sh.Dinesh caused in the road traffic accident on 25.03.2016.
The connected case/DAR bearing (MACP No. 2305/16) has been filed qua the injuries sustained by petitioner/injured Hitesh Panchal in the same road traffic accident.
2. Brief facts as made out from the abovesaid DARs are that on 25.03.2016, petitioner/ injured Hitesh Panchal alongwith his friend Dinesh (since deceased) went to Sai Baba Mandir on motorcycle bearing no. DL 9 SAW 6886, which was being driven by Dinesh and while they were coming back and had reached near Toora Mandi, opposite Sinha hospital, Najafgarh, New Delhi at about 10:00 PM, the offending vehicle bearing no. HR 06X 0707 hit their motorcycle due to which both of them fell down and sustained injuries. It is further stated that after accident, injured Hitesh Panchal was taken to Sinha hospital from where he was referred to Medanta hospital, Gurgaon, where he remained admitted till 30.03.2016 for treatment. It is stated that after accident, Dinesh ( since deceased ) was taken to Mata Chanan Devi hospital, where he died during treatment due to the injuries sustained in the accident. It is also stated that accident had taken place due to rash and negligent driving of R1, who was driving the offending vehicle at the time of accident. Accordingly, the present case was registered vide FIR No. 165/16 u/s 279/338/304A IPC at PS Najafgarh.
On conclusion of the investigation, the present DAR (bearing MACP No. 2315/16) has been filed by the IO qua death of deceased Dinesh in the above said accident. Further, the connected DAR (bearing MACP No. 2305/16) has been filed by the IO in respect of the injuries sustained by petitioner/ injured Hitesh (MACP Nos. 2315/16 & 2305/16 ) Yash Lata & Hitesh Panchal Vs. Ranbir Singh 7/35 8 Panchal in the same accident.
3. WS has been filed on behalf of R2 Royal Sundram General Insurance Company Ltd, (insurer of the offending vehicle) and therein it has been stated that the amount claimed by the claimants was highly exorbitant and without any basis. It is further stated that liability of the insurance company, if any was subject to terms, conditions, exceptions and limitation of the insurance policy and involvement and negligence of the vehicle. Further, in case bearing MACP No. 2315/16, R2/ insurance company had offered a compensation amount of Rs.8,50,884/ subject to producing proof of age of mother and father of the deceased and in case bearing MACP No. 2305/16, respondentinsurance company had offered a compensation of Rs.50,000/ to the injured therein. It has also been prayed therein that in the fact and circumstances of the case, an award may be passed in accordance with law.
4. It is pertinent to mention here that WS has not been filed in this case on behalf of R1 Ranbir Singh ( drivercumowner of the offending vehicle).
5. In the present cases, since, common question of law and facts were involved in both these cases/DARs bearing MACP No.2315/16 & MACP No. 2305/16, the common issues were framed and the same were consolidated for the purpose of recording the evidence by treating the case bearing MACP No. 2315/16 as "Leading Case" vide order dated 06.12.2016 passed by the Ld. Predecessor of this court.
On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed in the abovesaid cases/petition on 06.12.2016 by the Ld. Predecessor of this court :
(MACP Nos. 2315/16 & 2305/16 ) Yash Lata & Hitesh Panchal Vs. Ranbir Singh 8/35 9 ISSUES :
1. Whether Dinesh sustained fatal injuries and Hitesh sustained injuries in a motor vehicle accident dated 25.03.2016 due to rash and negligent driving of vehicle (car) no. HR 06X 0707 being driven and owned by by R1 Ranbir Singh and insured by Royal Sundrum General Insurance Company Ltd. ? ...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 PW1 Hitesh Panchal(petitioner/ injured in MACP No. 2305/16) and PW2 Smt. Yash Lata (petitioner no. 1 in MACP No. 2315/16) and thereafter, PE was closed on behalf of the petitioners.
7. In the instant cases, perusal of record reveals that no RE have been led on behalf of the respondents and on 10.07.2018, it was stated on behalf of R2/ insurance company that no RE was to be led and accordingly, RE on behalf of R2/ insurance company was closed vide order dated 10.07.2018. Vide same order, RE on behalf of R1 was also closed.
8. I have heard the arguments put forward by Ld. counsels for the petitioners and R2/ insurance company and have carefully gone through record of the case. I have carefully considered the evidence led by the petitioners in support of their case. I have also carefully perused written submissions filed on behalf of the petitioners and R2/ insurance company.
It is pertinent to mention here that the arguments have not been (MACP Nos. 2315/16 & 2305/16 ) Yash Lata & Hitesh Panchal Vs. Ranbir Singh 9/35 10 addressed in this case on behalf of R1 Ranbir Singh (drivercumowner of offending vehicle), despite opportunity being given.
9. The issuewise findings are as under :
10. ISSUE No. 1Whether Dinesh sustained fatal injuries and Hitesh sustained injuries in a motor vehicle accident dated 25.03.2016 due to rash and negligent driving of vehicle (car) no. HR 06X 0707 being driven and owned by by R1 Ranbir Singh and insured by Royal Sundrum General Insurance Company Ltd. ? ...OPP The onus to prove the abovesaid issue no. 1 was upon the petitioners and in order to discharge the said onus , the petitioners have examined PW1 Hitesh Panchal, who has filed his evidence by way of affidavit (Ex. PW1/A), wherein it has been stated that on 25.03.2016, he alongwith his friend Dinesh (since deceased) went to Sai Baba Mandir on motorcycle bearing no. DL 9 SAW 6886 which was being driven by Dinesh and while they were coming back and had reached near Toora Mandi, opposite Sinha hospital, Najafgarh, New Delhi at about 10:00 PM, the offending vehicle bearing no. HR 06X 0707 hit their motorcycle due to which both of them fell down and sustained injuries. PW1 further deposed that after accident, he was taken to Sinha hospital from where he was referred to Medanta hospital, Gurgaon, where he remained admitted till 30.03.2016 for treatment. PW1 deposed that after accident, Dinesh ( since deceased) was taken to Mata Chanan Devi hospital, where he died during treatment due to the injuries sustained in the accident. PW1 also deposed that accident had taken place due to rash and negligent driving of R1, who was driving the offending vehicle at the time of accident.
The important fact is that the abovesaid witness i.e. PW1 Hitesh (MACP Nos. 2315/16 & 2305/16 ) Yash Lata & Hitesh Panchal Vs. Ranbir Singh 10/35 11 Panchal was cross examined on behalf of R2/ insurance company, but nothing material has come on record which could assail the credibility or trustworthiness of this witness.
In his cross examination on behalf of R2/ insurance company, PW1 stated that accident took place at Toora Mandi, Najafgarh and Dinesh was holding driving licence at the time of accident. PW1 further stated that his vehicle was on the left side of the road and he do not remember if the offending vehicle hit from left side or right side. PW1 also denied the suggestion that he was deposing falsely. In these circumstances, nothing material has come on record which could shake the credibility of this witness qua his deposition regarding the manner in which the accident was caused in this case.
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 Dinesh received fatal injuries and died and petitioner/injuredHitesh Panchal sustained injuries in motor vehicle accident dated 25.03.2016 due to rash and negligent driving of offending vehicle no. HR 06X 0707, which was being driven and owned by R1 Ranbir Singh and insured with R2/ Royal Sundrum General Insurance Company Ltd at the time of accident.
Accordingly, issue no.1 is decided in favour of the petitioners and against the respondents.11. ISSUE No. 2
Whether the petitioners are entitled to claim compensation, if so, what amount and from whom ? ...OPP The onus to prove the abovesaid issue no. 2 in MACP No. 2315/16 was upon the petitioners therein and in order to discharge the said onus, the petitioners (MACP Nos. 2315/16 & 2305/16 ) Yash Lata & Hitesh Panchal Vs. Ranbir Singh 11/35 12 have examined PW2 Yash Lata ( petitioner no. 1 in MACP No. 2315/16), who has filed her evidence by way of affidavit (Ex. PW2/A), wherein it has been stated that she was mother of the deceased in the said case and was well conversant with the facts and circumstances of the case. PW2 further deposed that on 25.03.2016 at about 10:00 PM, her son Dinesh alongwith his friend Hitesh Panchal met with an accident due to rash and negligent driving of offending vehicle bearing no. HR 06X 0707 and in the said accident, her son Dinesh received grievous injuries and was taken to nearby hospital, from where he was taken to Mata Chanan Devi hospital, Janak Puri, New Delhi, where he died during treatment and postmortem was conducted at RTRM hospital Jaffar Pur Kalan, New Delhi. PW2 further deposed that her son Dinesh (since deceased) was pursuing Nursing course from Sharda University, NOIDA and her son was also doing part time job as male nurse and was earning Rs.14,000/pm. PW2 deposed that they have spent Rs.90,287/ on the treatment of their son. PW2 further deposed that her son Dinesh was unmarried and had left behind her and his father Sh. Bhupender Kumar as only legal heirs. PW2 has also relied upon the documents Ex. PW2/1 to Ex. PW2/14.
Hence view of the above and view of the material and evidence record, it is clear that deceased Dinesh received fatal injuries and died in motor vehicle accident dated 25.03.2016 due to rash and negligent driving of offending vehicle no. HR 06X 0707, which was being driven and owned by R1 Ranbir Singh and insured with R2/ Royal Sundrum General Insurance Company Ltd at the time of accident and as such, the petitioners, being the LRs of deceasedDinesh, have become entitled to claim compensation for death of the said deceased in the abovesaid accident.
12. Quantum of compensation payable to LRs of the deceasedDinesh is (MACP Nos. 2315/16 & 2305/16 ) Yash Lata & Hitesh Panchal Vs. Ranbir Singh 12/35 13 ascertained under the following heads:
13. AGE & MULTIPLIER As per his driving licence (Ex. PW2/4) and other documents on record, the date of birth of the deceased Dinesh was 27.6.1997 and as such, he was about 19 years of age at the time of accident on 25.3.2016. Hence, the multiplier of '18' is taken in this case.
14. LOSS OF DEPENDENCY In the present case, in view of the material/evidence on record, it is evident that at the time of accident, the deceased - Dinesh was unmarried and has left behind two LRs i.e. Smt. Yash Lata ( mother ) and Sh. Bhupender Kumar ( father ). In these circumstances, in view of the law/guidelines laid down in the case titled as 'Sarla Verma & Ors. Vs. DTC & Anr' [ reported as (2009 )6SCC 121] , 50% of the income of the deceased is liable to be deducted from his total income towards personal and living expenses of the deceased.
In view of the above and in view of the material on record, the annual contribution of the deceased to the family multiplied by a multiplier as per above guidelines shall give the loss of dependency to the entire family.
In the instant case, it is being submitted on behalf of the petitioners that at the time of accident, deceased Dinesh was pursuing Nursing course from Sharda University, NOIDA and he was also doing part time job as male nurse and was earning Rs.14,000/pm, however no evidence, documentary or otherwise, regarding the said employment or income of the deceased have been brought on record by the petitioners and in absence thereof, the minimum wages prescribed during the relevant period i.e Rs. 9,178/p.m is taken as criteria for calculating the loss of (MACP Nos. 2315/16 & 2305/16 ) Yash Lata & Hitesh Panchal Vs. Ranbir Singh 13/35 14 dependency in the instant case: In view of the above, the loss of dependency to the family on account of the death of the deceased Dinesh can be calculated as under:
a) Income of deceased Dinesh :Rs. 9,178/ p.m
b) 40% addition towards future prospects : Rs. 3,671/
c) 50% deduction towards on personal and living expenses of deceased. : Rs. 6,424/
d) Monthly loss of dependency (Rs. 9,178/ + Rs. 3,671/ : Rs. 6,425/ Rs 6,424/)
e) Annual loss of dependency to the family due to death of deceased : Rs. 77,100/ (Rs. 6,425/ x 12)
f) Total loss of dependency to the family due to death of deceased ( Rs. 77,100/ x 18) : Rs.13,87,800/ Hence, in view of the above, the total loss of dependency to the family on account of death of the deceased Dinesh comes to Rs. 13,87,800 / and as such, the petitioners shall be entitled to the said amount i.e Rs. 13,87,800/(Rupees Thirteen Lacs, Eighty Seven Thousand, Eight Hundred only) as compensation under the head 'loss of dependency'.
15. MEDICAL EXPENSES In the present case, in view of the material/evidence on record, it is evident that after the accident on 25.3.2016, Dinesh ( since deceased) remained (MACP Nos. 2315/16 & 2305/16 ) Yash Lata & Hitesh Panchal Vs. Ranbir Singh 14/35 15 hospitalized at Mata Chanan Devi Hospital, Janak Puri , New Delhi , where he died during the treatment. PW2 Smt. Yash Lata has proved the medical and treatment bills amounting to Rs. 90,287/ qua deceased Dinesh, pertaining to the said Mata Chanan Devi Hospital, Janak Puri , New Delhi as Ex. PW2/15. There is no reason to doubt the said bills, Ex. PW2/15 (colly.). In these circumstances and in view of the material on record, the petitioners are entitled to a sum of Rs. 90,287/ (Rupees Ninety Thousand, Two Hundred, Eighty Seven Only ) towards medical expenses of the deceasedDinesh.
16. LOSS OF ESTATE In terms of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case titled as ' National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi & Ors. ( reported as 2017 SCC OnLine SC 1720), a sum of Rs. 15,000/ is awarded towards the head 'loss of estate'.
17. 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'.
18. LOSS OF CONSORTIUM In terms of the law /guidelines laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case titled as 'Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd Vs. Nanu Ram' ( reported as 2018 SCC OnLine SC 1546), a sum of Rs. 80,000/ ( Rs. 40,000/ each to petitioner nos. 1&2 ) is awarded to the petitioner no.1 Yash Lata ( mother of the deceased) and petitioner no.2 Bhupender Kumar ( father of the deceased) (MACP Nos. 2315/16 & 2305/16 ) Yash Lata & Hitesh Panchal Vs. Ranbir Singh 15/35 16 towards 'loss of filial consortium'.
19. LOSS OF LOVE AND AFFECTION In the instant case, due to the death of deceased Dinesh, his parents i.e petitioner no.1 Yash Lata ( mother ) and petitioner no.2 Bhupender Kumar ( father) have suffered loss of love and affection. In these circumstances and having regard to the fact and circumstances of the present case and in view of law /guidelines laid down in the case - Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd Vs. Nanu Ram (supra), a sum of Rs. 60,000/ ( Rs. 30,000/ each to petitioner nos. 1&2 ) is awarded as compensation under the head loss of love and affection .
20. 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.13,87,800 /
2. Medical expenses Rs. 90,287/ 3 Loss of love and affection (30,000 x 2) Rs. 60,000/ 4 Loss of Filial Consortium (40,000 x 2) Rs.80,000/ 5 For funeral expenses Rs.15,000/ 6 Loss of estate Rs.15,000/ TOTAL Rs. 16,48,087/ rounded of Rs. 16,48,500/
21. 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 (MACP Nos. 2315/16 & 2305/16 ) Yash Lata & Hitesh Panchal Vs. Ranbir Singh 16/35 17 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. 16,48,500// from the date of filing of petition i.e. 05.11.2016 till realization.
22. APPORTIONMENT The abovesaid award amount i.e Rs. 16,48,500/ (Rupees Sixteen Lacs, Forty Eighty Thousand Five Hundred only) shall be apportioned amongst the LRs of the deceased - Dinesh in the following manner with proportionate interest .
S. No. Name of the petitioner/relation with deceased Amount
1. Petitioner no.1 Smt. Yash Lata ( mother ) Rs.11,48,500/
2. Petitioner no.2 Sh. Bhupender Kumar ( father ) Rs. 5,00,000/ Total Rs. 16,48,500/
23. RELIEF IN MACP No. 2315/16 ( Yash Lata Vs. Ranbir Singh & Anr.) Thus in view of the above discussion & observations and having regard to the fact and circumstances of the present case, an award for a sum of Rs. 16,48,500/ (Rupees Sixteen Lacs, Forty Eighty Thousand Five Hundred only) alongwith interest @ 9% p.a from the date of filing of the petition i.e 05.11.2016 till realization is passed in favour of the petitioners-Smt. Yash Lata & Sh. Bhupender Kumar and against the respondents .
(MACP Nos. 2315/16 & 2305/16 ) Yash Lata & Hitesh Panchal Vs. Ranbir Singh 17/35 18
24. FORMIVA SUMMARY OF THE COMPUTATION OF AWARD AMOUNT IN DEATH CASES TO BE INCORPORATED IN THE AWARD
i) Date of accident : 25.3.2016
ii). Name of the deceased : Sh. Dinesh
iii). Age of the deceased : 19 years ( at the time of accident)
iv). Occupation of the deceased: Private Job
v). Income of the deceased : Rs. 9,178/
vi). Name , age and relationship of legal representative of deceased S.No. Name Age Relation with deceased
(i) Smt. Yash Lata 44 years Mother
(ii) Sh. Bhupender Kumar 46 years Father Computation of Compensation S. No. Heads Awarded by the Claims Tribunal
7. Income of the deceased (A) Rs. 9,178/per month
8. AddFuture Prospects (B) Rs. 3,671/
9. LessPersonal expenses of the deceased (C) Rs. 6,424/
10. Monthly loss of dependency Rs. 6,425/ [ (A+B)C=D]
11. Annual Loss of dependency ( D x12) Rs 77,100/ (MACP Nos. 2315/16 & 2305/16 ) Yash Lata & Hitesh Panchal Vs. Ranbir Singh 18/35 19 12. Multiplier (E) 18
13. Total loss of dependency (D x 12x E=F) Rs. 13,87,800/
14. Medical Expenses (G) Rs. 90,287/
15. Compensation for loss of love and affection (H) Rs. 60,000/
16. Compensation for loss of filial consortium (I) Rs. 80,000/
17. Compensation for loss of estate (J) Rs. 15,000/
18. Compensation towards funeral expenses (K) Rs. 15,000/
19. TOTAL COMPENSATION Rs. 16,48,087/ rounded of (F+G+H+I+J+K=L) Rs. 16,48,500/
20. RATE OF INTEREST AWARDED
21. Interest amount up to the date of award (M) @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of petition i.e. 05.11.2016 till realization.
22. Total amount including interest ( L+M) Rs.16,48,500 / + @9% per annum from the date of filing of petition i.e. 05.11.2016 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. 17.11.2018 ( Clause 31) (MACP Nos. 2315/16 & 2305/16 ) Yash Lata & Hitesh Panchal Vs. Ranbir Singh 19/35 20
25. Further, the statement of petitioner/LRs of the deceased ( in MACP No. 2315/16) regarding their financial status, needs and liabilities have also been recorded in this case. In view of the said statement of the petitioner / LRs of the deceased & having regard to facts and circumstances of the present case, the award amount shall be distributed as follows: S.No Name Status Amount of Release Amount of FDR Period of Award Amount Rs. FDR
1. Smt Yash Lata Mother Rs. 11,48,500/ Rs. 1,48,000/ Rs. 1,00,000/ 1 year Rs. 1,00,000/ 2 years Rs. 1,00,000/ 3 years Rs. 1,00,000/ 4 years Rs. 1,00,000/ 5 years Rs. 1,00,000/ 6 years Rs. 1,00,000/ 7 years Rs. 1,00,000/ 8 years Rs. 1,00,000/ 9 years Rs. 1,00,000/ 10 years
2. Sh. Bhupender Father Rs. 5,00,000/ Rs. 50,000/ Rs. 45,000/ 1 year Kumar Rs. 45,000/ 2 years Rs. 45,000/ 3 years Rs. 45,000/ 4 years Rs. 45,000/ 5 years Rs. 45,000/ 6 years Rs. 45,000/ 7 years Rs. 45,000/ 8 years Rs. 45,000/ 9 years Rs. 45,000/ 10 years (MACP Nos. 2315/16 & 2305/16 ) Yash Lata & Hitesh Panchal Vs. Ranbir Singh 20/35 21
26. The onus to prove the abovesaid issue no. 2 in MACP No. 2305/16 was upon the petitioner/injured Hitesh Panchal and in order to discharge the said onus, the petitioner/ injured Hitesh Panchal has examined himself as PW1 and has filed his evidence by way of affidavit (Ex. PW1/A), wherein it has been stated that he was the petitioner/ injured in the said case and was well conversant with the fact and circumstances of the case. PW1 further deposed that on 25.03.2016 at about 10:00 PM, he alongwith his friend Dinesh met with an accident due to rash and negligent driving of offending vehicle bearing no. HR 06X 0707 and in the said accident, his friend Dinesh received grievous injuries and later on died in the hospital and he also sustained injuries and was taken to nearby hospital, from where he was taken to Medanta hospital, Gurgaon, where he remained admitted till 30.03.2016 for treatment and that later on, he took treatment as an OPD patient from Fortis Memorial hospital, Gurgaon. PW1 deposed that he has spent a sum of Rs.1.75 lacs on treatment and Rs.40,000/each on special diet and convenience. PW1 further deposed that he has studied upto class 12th and his father was running a welding shop and he was working with his father as helping hand. PW1 has also relied upon the documents Ex. PW1/1 to Ex. PW1/12.
Hence view of the above and view of the material and evidence record, it is clear that petitioner/ injured Hitesh Panchal sustained injuries in motor vehicle accident dated 25.03.2016 due to rash and negligent driving of offending vehicle no. HR 06X 0707, which was being driven and owned by R1 Ranbir Singh and insured with R2/ Royal Sundrum General Insurance Company Ltd at the time of accident and as such, the petitioner/ injured Hitesh Panchal has become entitled to claim compensation for the injuries sustained by him in the abovesaid accident.
Quantum of compensation payable to the petitioner/ injured Hitesh (MACP Nos. 2315/16 & 2305/16 ) Yash Lata & Hitesh Panchal Vs. Ranbir Singh 21/35 22 Panchal is ascertained under the following heads:
27. NATURE AND EXTENT OF INJURIES As per the medical treatment record/discharge summary, petitioner/ injured Hitesh Panchal is a case of fracture right patella .
Further, the perusal of the record reveals that petitioner/injured has not filed on record any document to show that he has suffered any permanent physical disability due to the injuries sustained by him in the accident in this case.
28. MEDICINES & TREATMENT In the present case, as per record, the petitioner/injured Hitesh Panchal has undergone initial treatment at Sinha Hospital, Najafgarh , New Delhi and from there he was referred to Medanta Hospital, Gurgaon, where he remained admitted till 30.3.2016 and later on , he also took treatment as OPD patient from Forties Memorial Research Institute , Gurgaon .
Further, in regard to the treatment undergone by him, petitioner/injured Hitesh Panchal has placed on record, the medical bill / receipts pertaining Sinha Hospital, Najafgarh , New Delhi amounting to Rs. 5,000/ & medical bill / receipts pertaining to Medanta Hospital, Gurgaon amounting to Rs. 1,29,683/ and medical bill/ receipts in respect of Forties Memorial Research Institute , Gurgaon amounting to Rs. 4010/. There is no reason to doubt the said bills/receipts. In these circumstances and in view of the material on record, the petitioner/injured is entitled to a sum of Rs. 5,000/ + Rs, 1,29,683/ + Rs. 4010/ = Rs. 1,38,693/ and accordingly, the petitioner/ injured Hitesh Panchal shall be awarded the said amount i.e Rs. 1,38,693/(Rupees One Lakh , Thirty Eight Thousand, Six Hundred Ninety three Only ) towards medicines and medical treatment.
(MACP Nos. 2315/16 & 2305/16 ) Yash Lata & Hitesh Panchal Vs. Ranbir Singh 22/35 23
29. CONVEYANCE & SPECIAL DIET In the present case, as per the medical treatment record, petitioner/ injured Hitesh Panchal is a case of fracture right patella. In these circumstances, the petitioner/injured must have visited the hospital/doctors for his treatment and would also have required special diet for certain period to recover from the injuries sustained in the accident.
It is being submitted on behalf of the petitioner/injured that he has spent Rs. 40,000/ each on conveyance and special diet, however no evidence, documentary or otherwise, in this regard has been brought on record on behalf of the petitioner. Further, it is pertinent to note that from the material on record, it is evident that the petitioner/injured has not suffered any permanent disability due to the injuries sustained in the accident in this case.
Hence, in view of the above and in view of the material on record, petitioner/injured is entitled to a sum of Rs. 25,000/ ( Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) towards conveyance. Further, in view of the injuries suffered by him, the petitioner/injured must have needed special diet for a certain period to have a fast and proper recovery. In these circumstances and in view of the material on record, the petitioner/injured is also awarded Rs. 25,000/ (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) towards expenses for special diet.
30. LOSS OF INCOME In the present case, the petitioner/injured stated that he has studied up to class12th and his father was running a welding shop and he was working with his father as helping hand at the time of accident, however, no documentary evidence in this regard has been placed on record and in absence thereof, the minimum wages for matriculates during the relevant period i.e Rs. 11,154/ p.m is taken as criteria (MACP Nos. 2315/16 & 2305/16 ) Yash Lata & Hitesh Panchal Vs. Ranbir Singh 23/35 24 for calculating the loss of income to the petitioner/injured.
In the instant case, petitioner/injured has suffered fracture right patella and has remained hospitalized for about five days . Further, in view of the material on record, it appears that it might have taken about three months for the petitioner/ injured to recover from the said injuries sustained by him in the accident. In these circumstances and in view of the material on record, the petitioner shall be entitled to a sum of Rs. 11,154/ x 3= Rs. 33,462/ (Rupees Thirty Three Thousand, Four Hundred Sixty Two only) under the head ' Loss of Income'.
31. PAIN & SUFFERINGS As per the settled law, for assessing the pain & sufferings, the following factors have to be taken into account :
(a) Nature of injury
(b) Parts of body where injuries occurred
(c) Surgeries, if any
(d) Confinement in hospital
(e) Duration of the treatment.
In the instant case, in view of the material/evidence on record, there is no element of doubt that the petitioner/injuredHitesh Panchal has suffered fracture right patella and has remained hospitalized for about five days due to the said injuries sustained by him. In these circumstances and in view of the law laid down in the case titled as "Rekha Jain Vs. National Insurance Co. Ltd." (arising out of SLP (C) Nos. 564951 of 2012), the petitioner/injured is entitled to compensation on account of pain & suffering due to the accident. The pain and sufferings of petitioner/injured can not be adequately compensated in terms of money however, in view of the facts & circumstances of the present case and in view of the material on record, a sum of Rs. 50,000/ ( Rupees Fifty Thousand only) is awarded to the (MACP Nos. 2315/16 & 2305/16 ) Yash Lata & Hitesh Panchal Vs. Ranbir Singh 24/35 25 petitioner towards the head " pain & sufferings".
32. LOSS OF ENJOYMENT OF LIFE AND AMENITIES The petitioner/injured has claimed that he has suffered the enjoyment of life and other amenities on account of the accident. The petitioner/injured was about 18 years of age at the time of accident and has suffered fracture right patella and was hospitalized for about five days due to the said injuries sustained in the accident. In these circumstances and in view of the law laid down vide judgment of Rekha Jain (Supra), the petitioner/injured shall be entitled to a sum of Rs. 30,000/ (Rupees Thirty Thousand only) as compensation towards loss of enjoyment of life and amenities. In addition to this, the petitioner/injured shall also be entitled to a sum of Rs. 20,000/ (Rupees Twenty Thousand only) as compensation for mental and physical shock suffered by him due to the accident in this case.
33. The breakup of compensation that has been awarded to the petitioner/ injured Hitesh Panchal is tabulated as below : S.No. HEADS AMOUNT (in Rupees) 1 Medicines & Treatment Rs. 1,38,693/
2. Conveyance Rs. 25,000/
3. Special Diet Rs. 25,000/
4. Loss of Income Rs. 33,462/
5. Pain & Sufferings Rs. 50,000/
6. Loss of Enjoyment of Life and Amenities Rs. 30,000/
7. Compensation for mental and physical shock Rs. 20,000/
8. Total Rs. 3,22,155/ rounded of to Rs. 3,22,500/ (MACP Nos. 2315/16 & 2305/16 ) Yash Lata & Hitesh Panchal Vs. Ranbir Singh 25/35 26
34. INTEREST In the instant case, there is nothing on record, which could justify the withholding of interest on the award amount. In these circumstances and having regard to the fact and circumstances of the present case, it will be just and proper to award interest @ 9% per annum on the award amount in this case. Hence, the petitioner/injured is awarded interest @ 9% per annum on the abovesaid compensation/ award amount i.e Rs. 3,22,500/ from the date of filing of petition i.e. 05.11.2016 till realization.
35. RELIEF IN MACP No. 2305/16 ( Hitesh Panchal Vs. Ranbir Singh & Anr. ) Thus, in view of the above discussion & observations and having regard to the fact and circumstances of the present case, an award for a sum of Rs. 3,22,500/ (Rupees Three Lacs, Twenty Two Thousand Five Hundred only) alongwith interest @ 9% p.a from the date of filing of the petition i.e 05.11.2016 till realization is passed in favour of the petitioner/injured-Hitesh Panchal and against the respondents.
36. FORMIVB SUMMARY OF THE COMPUTATION OF AWARD AMOUNT IN INJURY CASES TO BE INCORPORATED IN THE AWARD
i) Date of accident : 25.3.2016
ii). Name of the injured : Hitesh Panchal
iii). Age of the injured : 18 years ( at the time of accident) (MACP Nos. 2315/16 & 2305/16 ) Yash Lata & Hitesh Panchal Vs. Ranbir Singh 26/35 27
iv). Occupation of the injured : Private Job (at the time of accident)
v). Income of the injured : Rs. 11,154/ p.m
vi). Nature of injury : Grievous
vii). Medical treatment taken : Sinha Hospital, Najafgarh , New Delhi by the injured Medanta Hospital,Gurgaon & Forties Memorial Research Institute , Gurgaon
viii). Period of hospitalization : About 05 days
ix). Whether any permanent : No disability?If yes, give details
10. Computation of Compensation S. No. Heads Awarded by the Tribunal
11. Pecuniary Loss:
(i) Expenditure on treatment Rs. 1,38,693/
(ii) Expenditure on conveyance Rs. 25,000/
(iii) Expenditure on special diet Rs. 25,000/
(iv) Cost of attendant
(v) Loss of earning capacity
(vi) Loss of income Rs. 33,462/
(vii) Any other loss which may require any
special treatment or aid to the injured for
the rest of his life
12. Non Pecuniary Loss:
(i) Compensation for mental and physical Rs. 20,000/
shock
(ii) Pain and suffering Rs. 50,000/
(iii) Loss of amenities of life Rs. 30,000/
(iv) Disfiguration
(MACP Nos. 2315/16 & 2305/16 ) Yash Lata & Hitesh Panchal Vs. Ranbir Singh 27/35
28
(v) Loss of marriage prospects
(vi) Loss of earning, inconvenience, hardships,
disappointment, frustration, mental stress
dejectment and unhappiness in future life
etc.,
13. Disability resulting in loss of earning capacity
(i) Percentage of disability assessed and nature Nil of disability as permanent or temporary
(ii) Loss of amenities or loss of expectation of life span on account of disability
(iii) Percentage of loss of earning capacity in relation to disability
(iv) Loss of future income(Income x % Earning Capacity x Multiplier)
14. Total Compensation Rs. 3,22,155/ rounded of to Rs. 3,22,500/
15. INTEREST AWARDED
16. Interest amount up to the date of award @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of petition i.e. 05.11.2016 till realization.
17. Total amount including interest Rs. 3,22,500/ + interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the petition i.e. 05.11.2016 till realization.
18. Award amount released As per table given below
19. Award amount kept in FDRs As per table given below
20. Mode of disbursement of the award By credit in the SB Account of amount to the claimant(s) (Clause29) the petitioner/injured.
21 Next Date for compliance of the award. 16.11.2018 ( Clause 31) (MACP Nos. 2315/16 & 2305/16 ) Yash Lata & Hitesh Panchal Vs. Ranbir Singh 28/35 29
37. Further, the statement of petitioner/injured Sh. Hitesh Panchal regarding his financial status, needs and liabilities have also been recorded in this case. In view of the said statement of the petitioner/injured and having regard to facts and circumstances of the present case, the award amount shall be distributed as follows: S.No. Name Status Amount of Release Amount of Period of Award Amount in Rs. FDR FDR
1. Hitesh Panchal Injured Rs.3,22,500 / Rs. 22,500/ Rs. 50,000/ 1 year Rs. 50,000/ 2 years Rs. 50,000/ 3 years Rs. 50,000/ 4 years Rs. 50,000/ 5 years Rs. 50,000/ 6 years
38. LIABILITY ( In both the cases bearing MACP No. 2315/16 & MACP No. 2305/16) The offending vehicle bearing no. HR 06X0707 was being driven and owned by respondent No.1Ranbir Singh and was insured with respondent no.2/Royal Sundrum General Insurance Co. Ltd at the time of accident and as such, respondent no. 2/ Royal Sundrum General Insurance Co. Ltd being the 'principal tort feasor', shall be liable to pay the awarded amount in both these cases bearing MACP No. 2315/16 & MACP No. 2305/16).
Hence, in view of the above, Issue No. 2 is decided accordingly.
(MACP Nos. 2315/16 & 2305/16 ) Yash Lata & Hitesh Panchal Vs. Ranbir Singh 29/35 30
39. In both these cases bearing MACP No. 2315/16 & MACP No. 2305/16 , the award amounts shall be deposited /transferred by respondent no. 2/ Royal Sundrum General Insurance Company Ltd in the Account No. 37665510911 of 'MACT (SouthWest), Dwarka Courts, New Delhi ' at State Bank of India, District Court Complex, Sector10, Dwarka New Delhi (IFSC Code SBIN0011566 and MICR Code 110002483) by RTGS/NEFT/IMPS under intimation, with proof of notice to the claimant/petitioners and their counsel, to the Nazir of this court .
40. In MACP No. 2315/16 , petitioner no.1 Smt. Yash Lata has produced the passbook of her SB Account No. 311301000002884 at Indian Overseas Bank, Bharuwala Grant3113, Dehradun (IFSC Code No. IOBA0003113), wherein it has been endorsed that " No ATM and Cheque book to be issued ".
It is being requested on behalf of the petitioner no.1 Smt. Yash Lata that the abovesaid cash amount may be transferred to her aforesaid SB Account at Indian Overseas Bank, Bharuwala Grant3113, Dehradun .
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. 311301000002884 of petitioner no.1 Smt. Yash Lata at Indian Overseas Bank, Bharuwala Grant3113, Dehradun and to keep the remaining amount in the form of above mentioned FDRs.
Manager, Indian Overseas Bank, Bharuwala Grant3113, Dehradun is directed to release the abovesaid cash amount to petitioner no.1 Smt. Yash Lata 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 no.1.
(MACP Nos. 2315/16 & 2305/16 ) Yash Lata & Hitesh Panchal Vs. Ranbir Singh 30/35 31 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.
Manager of the concerned bank is directed not to permit premature encashment or loan qua the abovesaid FDRs to the petitioner no.1 Smt. Yash Lata 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.1 Smt. Yash Lata.
The abovesaid Indian Overseas Bank, Bharuwala Grant3113, Dehradun is also directed not to issue any cheque book and/or debit card to the petitioner no.1 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. Yash Lata .
Indian Overseas Bank, Bharuwala Grant3113, Dehradun shall permit account holder i.e petitioner no.1 Smt. Yash Lata withdraw money from her above said saving bank account by means of a withdrawal form .
41. In MACP No. 2315/16 , petitioner no.2 Sh. Bhupender Kumar has produced the passbook of his SB Account No. 311301000002883 at Indian Overseas Bank, Bharuwala Grant3113, Dehradun (IFSC Code No. IOBA0003113), wherein it has been endorsed that " No ATM and Cheque book to be issued ".
It is being requested on behalf of the petitioner no. 2 Sh. Bhupender Kumar that the abovesaid cash amount may be transferred to his aforesaid SB Account at Indian Overseas Bank, Bharuwala Grant3113, Dehradun .
(MACP Nos. 2315/16 & 2305/16 ) Yash Lata & Hitesh Panchal Vs. Ranbir Singh 31/35 32 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. 311301000002883 of petitioner no. 2 Sh. Bhupender Kumar at Indian Overseas Bank, Bharuwala Grant3113, Dehradun and to keep the remaining amount in the form of above mentioned FDRs.
Manager, Indian Overseas Bank, Bharuwala Grant3113, Dehradun is directed to release the abovesaid cash amount to petitioner no. 2Sh. Bhupender Kumar 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 no.2.
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.2.
Manager of the concerned bank is directed not to permit premature encashment or loan qua the abovesaid FDRs to the petitioner no. 2 Sh. Bhupender Kumar 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 Sh. Bhupender Kumar.
The abovesaid Indian Overseas Bank, Bharuwala Grant3113, Dehradun is also directed not to issue any cheque book and / or debit card to the petitioner no.2 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. 2 Sh. Bhupender Kumar .
(MACP Nos. 2315/16 & 2305/16 ) Yash Lata & Hitesh Panchal Vs. Ranbir Singh 32/35 33 Indian Overseas Bank, Bharuwala Grant3113, Dehradun shall permit account holder i.e petitioner no. 2 Sh. Bhupender Kumar withdraw money from his abovesaid saving bank account by means of a withdrawal form ..
42. In MACP No. 2305/16 , petitioner/injured - Sh. Hitesh Panchal has produced the passbook of his SB Account No. 91082610002016 at Syndicate Bank, Najafgarh, New Delhi (IFSC Code No. SYNB0009108), wherein it has been endorsed that " No Cheque Book and ATM have been issued in this account ".
It is being requested on behalf of the petitioner/injured Sh. Hitesh Panchal that the abovesaid cash amount may be transferred to his aforesaid SB Account at Syndicate Bank, Najafgarh, New 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. 91082610002016 of petitioner /injured - Sh. Hitesh Panchal at Syndicate Bank, Najafgarh, New Delhi and to keep the remaining amount in the form of above mentioned FDRs.
Manager, Syndicate Bank, Najafgarh, New Delhi is directed to release the abovesaid cash amount to petitioner/injured Sh. Hitesh Panchal as per rules, as prayed.
At the time of maturity, the fixed deposit amount shall be credited in the aforesaid savings bank account of petitioner/injured.
All the original FDRs shall be retained by the concerned bank, however, the statement containing FDR number, amount, date of maturity and maturity amount shall be provided to petitioner/injured.
Manager of the concerned bank is directed not to permit premature (MACP Nos. 2315/16 & 2305/16 ) Yash Lata & Hitesh Panchal Vs. Ranbir Singh 33/35 34 encashment or loan qua the abovesaid FDRs to the petitioner/injured - Sh. Hitesh Panchal 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/injured - Sh. Hitesh Panchal.
The abovesaid Syndicate Bank, Najafgarh, New Delhi is also directed not to issue any cheque book and / or debit card to the petitioner/injured and if the same have already been issued, the said bank is directed to cancel the same and make an endorsement on the pass book that no cheque book or debit card shall be issued to petitioner/injured - Sh. Hitesh Panchal .
Syndicate Bank, Najafgarh, New Delhi shall permit account petitioner / injured - Sh. Hitesh Panchal to withdraw money from his abovesaid saving bank account by means of a withdrawal form .
43. The R3/Insurance company shall inform the petitioners in both the case bearing MACP No. 2315/16 & MACP No. 2305/16 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.
Copy of this award be sent to the concerned Manager, SBI, District Courts Complex, Sector 10, Dwarka, New Delhi & Manager, Indian Overseas Bank, Bharuwala Grant3113, Dehradun and Manager, Syndicate Bank, Najafgarh, New Delhi , for information / compliance.
Copy of this award be also given ''Dasti' to the petitioners/their counsel and Ld. Counsel for the respondent/insurance company.
The main judgment be placed in the file pertaining to the leading/ (MACP Nos. 2315/16 & 2305/16 ) Yash Lata & Hitesh Panchal Vs. Ranbir Singh 34/35 35 main case bearing MACP No. 2315/16 and the copy thereof be placed in the file of connected case bearing MACP No. 2305/16 .
Ahlmad is directed to prepare the separate misc. files and put up the same for filing of the compliance report on 16.11.2018.
File be consigned to the record room.
(Announced in the open (Paramjit Singh)
Court on 10.10.2018) PO, MACT (SouthWest District)
Dwarka Courts, New Delhi
10.10.2018
Digitally
signed by
PARAMJIT
PARAMJIT SINGH
SINGH Date:
2018.10.10
16:20:16
+0530
(MACP Nos. 2315/16 & 2305/16 ) Yash Lata & Hitesh Panchal Vs. Ranbir Singh 35/35