Delhi District Court
Gaurav vs Ramesh Dutt on 19 October, 2024
IN THE COURT OF SHRI TARUN YOGESH
LD. PO-MACT-01, SOUTH-WEST DISTRICT,
DWARKA COURTS, NEW DELHI
MACT No. 1241/2016
CNR No. DLSW01-002626-2015
FIR No. 329/2012
P.S. Murthal (Haryana)
In the matter of :
1) Sh. Gaurav
S/o Ved Prakash
R/o RZF-1048-B, T/F,
Khasra No.50/25, Guru Nanak Marg,
Raj Nagar-II, Palam Colony, New Delhi.
Permanent address :
H. No.0045, Kurar Ibrahimpur,
Distt, Sonipat, Haryana ... (Petitioner)
Versus
1) Sh. Ramesh Dutt
S/o Sh. Chandan Singh
R/o Kumaspur
P.S Murthal Distt, Sonipat,
Haryana. ...(Driver)
2) Sh. Ram Dhari
S/o Sh. Laxman Dass
R/o Shiv Shankar Agency
Meerut Road, Bahal Garh,
Dist. Sonipat-131001, Haryana. ...(Owner)
3) Future Generali India
At: Flat No.303-3010, Kailash Building
26, Kasturba Gandhi Marg,
Connaught Place, New Delhi. ...(Insurance Company)
... Respondents
MACT No. 1241/2016 Gaurav Vs. Ramesh Dutt & Ors Page No. 1 of 23
Date of Institution : 10.09.2015
Date of Judgment : 19.10.2024
AWAR D
Preface
1. Applicant Gaurav having met with accident being subject
matter of FIR No.329/12 PS Murthal, Sonipat, Haryana has
approached Claims Tribunal, Dwarka Courts seeking
compensation for grievous injuries sustained in road accident.
Background
2. A brief summary of relevant facts is that Gaurav and Manish riding the pillion of Apache Motorcycle (A/F) driven by Sandeep (since deceased) were going to Kurar from village Bhigan via service road on 10.11.2012 at around 1:00 to 1:30 pm when their motorcycle was hit by offending Three Wheeler Auto (LTV AR) No.HR-69-7518 coming from opposite side at very high speed in zig zag manner near Shahi Villa, G.T. Road, Murthal, Sonipat, Haryana.
3. Petitioner and his friends fell down on the road as result of the impact and injured Gaurav was immediately taken to Government Hospital, Sonipat by Highway Ambulance where his MLC was prepared. Injured Gaurav, therafter, got treated for injuries at Jaipur Golden Hospital, Delhi and Sir Ganga Ram Hospital, New Delhi where he remained hospitalized from 11.11.2012 to 23.11.2012.
4. It is submitted that grievous injuries sustained in motor vehicle accident on 10.11.2012 has been caused due to rash and negligent driving of Three Wheeler Auto No.HR-69-7518 coming from opposite side which hit their motorcycle on the MACT No. 1241/2016 Gaurav Vs. Ramesh Dutt & Ors Page No. 2 of 23 Service Road near Shahi Villa, G.T. Road, Murthal, Haryana and respondents being driver, owner and insurer of offending Three Wheeler Auto are jointly and severally liable to compensate him for pecuniary and non-pecuniary damages suffered on account of injury sustained in road accident.
Defence
5. R1/Ramesh Dutt (driver) and R2/Ram Dhari (owner) have filed joint written statement disputing territorial jurisdiction of Claims Tribunal, Dwarka Courts besides adverting to Cover Note No.D3573108 valid from 24.05.2012 to 23.05.2013 for contending that offending vehicle was fully insured and liability, if any, would be borne by the insurance company.
6. R3/Future Generali India Insurance Company Ltd. on its part has filed written statement affirming Policy No.V1816745- FCV of alleged LTV No.HR-69-7518 insured in the name of Ram Dhari from 24.05.2012 to 23.05.2013 and sought to raise statutory defences under section 134(c), 147, 149 along with all defences under section 170 of M.V. Act in case the driver and owner would fail to contest the claim.
Inquiry
7. Following issues were settled on 11.04.2018 and matter was posted for petitioner evidence.
i. Whether Gaurav sustained grievous injuries in a motor vehicle accident dt.
10.11.2012 due to rash and negligent driving of vehicle no. HR-69-7518 being driven by respondent no.1 Ramesh Dutt, owned by respondent no.2 Ram Dhari and insured by respondent no.3 Future Generali India ? .... OPP MACT No. 1241/2016 Gaurav Vs. Ramesh Dutt & Ors Page No. 3 of 23 ii. Whether the petitioner in the above mentioned case is entitled to claim compensation, if so, what amount and from whom? ... OPP iii. Relief.
8. PW-1 Sh. Gaurav in paras 2 to 7 of affidavit Ex.PW1/A has inter alia deposed about - (i) motor vehicle accident near Sahi Villa, G.T. Road, Murthal, Sonipat, Haryana on 10.11.2012 at about 1:00 to 1:30 pm caused by R1/Ramesh Dutt who was driving Three Wheeler (LTV AR) No. HR-69-7518 at very high speed in zig zag manner which hit the motorcycle being driven by Sandeep resulting in head injury with multiple contusions; (ii) MLC prepared at Government Hospital, Sonipat, Haryana followed by treatment at Jaipur Golden Hospital, Delhi and further treatment at Sir Ganga Ram Hospital, New Delhi where he remained admitted from 11.11.2012 to 23.11.2012; (iii) loss of monthly earning Rs. 15,000/- to Rs.20,000/- by running part time tuition centre in the name of M/s Gaurav Tuition Centre; (iv) expenses incurred on medicine, treatment, conveyance, special diet AND (v) general and special damages suffered on account of injuries sustained in road accident. PW-1 has also relied upon following documents referred in his affidavit:
i. Certificate-cum-Mark sheet of Senior Secondary and Mark-sheet of CBSE - Ex.PW-1/1 ii. Copy of Aadhar Card of injured - Ex.PW-1/2 iii. Treatment Record of Sir Ganga Ram Hospital - Mark 'A'
9. Dr. Pravendra Singh, Medical Officer and Member of Disability Board, Janak Puri, Super Specialty Hospital, New MACT No. 1241/2016 Gaurav Vs. Ramesh Dutt & Ors Page No. 4 of 23 Delhi examined as PW-2 has proved Disability Certificate Ex.PW-2/1 assessing 50% permanent disability in relation to right upper limb.
10. PW-1 and PW-2 have been cross-examined by Ld. Counsel for insurance company and petitioner's evidence was closed on 23.03.2022.
11. No evidence has been led by respondents. Discussion and Conclusion
12. Advocate Sh. A.K. Jha for injured and Advocate Ms. Sunanda Nimisha for Future Generali India Insurance Co. Ltd. have addressed their submissions. Ld. counsel for insurance company, in addition, has also adverted to Discharge Summary of J.P.N. Apex Trauma Centre, AIIMS w.r.t. self inflicted injury sustained in right wrist on 03.05.2013 around 06 months after Head Injury and Brachial Plexus caused in motor vehicle accident on 10.11.2012.
13. I have carefully perused pleadings and evidence adduced on judicial file. My issue wise finding is recorded below:
14. Issue No.1:
Whether Gaurav sustained grievous injuries in a motor vehicle accident dt. 10.11.2012 due to rash and negligent driving of vehicle no. HR-69-7518 being driven by respondent no.1 Ramesh Dutt, owned by respondent no.2 Ram Dhari and insured by respondent no.3 Future Generali India? ... OPP
15. PW-1 Sh. Gaurav in his examination-in-chief has deposed about motor vehicle accident near Sahi Villa, G.T. Road, Murthal, Sonipat, Haryana on 10.11.2012 at about 1:00 to 1:30 MACT No. 1241/2016 Gaurav Vs. Ramesh Dutt & Ors Page No. 5 of 23 pm caused by R1/Ramesh Dutt who was driving Three Wheeler (LTV AR) No. HR-69-7518 at very high speed in zig zag manner which hit the motorcycle being driven by Sandeep resulting in head injury with multiple contusions.
16. His testimony has remained consistent during cross- examination by Ld. counsel for respondents and witness having conceded of not wearing helmet at the time of accident has deposed that he could neither verify whether it was 'Head-on Collision' nor recollect the exact manner of accident.
17. R1/Ramesh Dutt (driver) on the other hand has neither availed his right to cross-examine injured nor entered witness- box for disputing rash and negligent driving of Three Wheeler Auto No. HR-69-7518. Adverse inference is therefore required to be raised against the driver as per the dicta of Hon'ble High Court of Orissa in National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Durdadshya Kumar Samal & Ors. 1987 SCC Online Ori. 57 AND Cholamandalam MS General Insurance Co. Vs. Smt. Kamlesh & Ors. decided by Hon'ble High Court of Delhi on 11 th November, 2008.
18. It is all the more well settled law that negligence in case of road traffic accident is required to be established on the touchstone of preponderance of probability and standard of proof beyond reasonable doubt does not apply to claim petitions under Motor Vehicle Act as held by Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in para 15 of Bimla Devi & Ors. Vs. Himachal Road Transport Corporation & Ors (2009) 13 SCC 530.
19. Following observations in para 15 of aforesaid judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court being relevant are extracted herein below :
MACT No. 1241/2016 Gaurav Vs. Ramesh Dutt & Ors Page No. 6 of 23 "15. In a situation of this nature, the Tribunal has rightly taken a holistic view of the matter. It was necessary to be borne in mind that strict proof of an accident caused by a praticular bus in a particular manner may not be possible to be done by the claimants. The claimaints were merely to establish their case on the touchstone of preponderance of probability. The standard of proof beyond reasonable doubt could not have been applied...."
20. Similar observation has been recorded by Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in para 12 of its judgment delivered in National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Smt. Pushpa Rana & Ors. 2007 SCC Online Del 1700 by holding that proceedings under Motor Vehicle Act are not akin to proceeding in a civil suit hence strict rules of evidence are not required to be followed and FIR against the driver along with criminal record of the case showing completion of investigation by the police leading to Final Report are sufficient proof to reach the conclusion that the driver was negligent.
21. FINDING : Issue No.1 is therefore decided in favour of petitioner Gaurav by holding that grievous injury sustained in road accident on 10.11.2012 was caused due to rash and negligent driving of Three Wheeler Auto No. HR-69-7518 by R1/Ramesh Dutt (driver) which vehicle was registered in the name of R2/Ram Dhani (owner) and insured with R3/Future Generali India Insurance Co. Ltd.
22. Issue No.2 Whether the petitioner in the above mentioned case is entitled to claim compensation, if so, what amount and from MACT No. 1241/2016 Gaurav Vs. Ramesh Dutt & Ors Page No. 7 of 23 whom? ... OPP
23. Injured Gaurav being admitted at Jaipur Golden Hospital as emergency case on 10.11.2012 was discharged on 11.11.2012 and thereafter continued to be treated at Sir Ganga Ram Hospital from 11.11.2012 to 23.11.2012 where NCCT of Brain revealed multiple cerebral contusions with brain stem contusions. He was managed conservatively and discharged in stable condition with further advice for follow-up. He has been examined for assessing permanent physical disability sustained in road accident and Disability Certificate issued by the Disability Board, Janak Puri Super Specialty Hospital mentions injured Gaurav as case of Post Traumatic Brachial Plexus Injury with Monoplegia (right side) resulting in 50% permanent disability. Injured Sh. Gaurav Antil is, therefore, entitled to be compensated for pecuniary and non- pecuniary loss suffered on account of grievous injury sustained in motor vehicle accident. Quantum of compensation payable to injured has to be assessed separately under pecuniary and non- pecuniary heads.
24. At the outset, it has to be borne in mind that compensation is not expected to be a windfall or a bonanza nor it should be niggardly and Courts & Tribunals have a duty to weigh the various factors and quantify the amount of compensation which should be just. What would be "just" compensation is a vexed question. There can be no golden rule applicable to all cases for measuring the value of human life or a limb. Measure of damages cannot be arrived at by precise mathematical calculations. It would depend upon the particular facts and circumstances, and attending peculiar or special features, if any, MACT No. 1241/2016 Gaurav Vs. Ramesh Dutt & Ors Page No. 8 of 23 as held by Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Helen C. Rebello Vs. Maharasthra SRTC, 1999 (1) SCC 90.
25. Following para of judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in R.D. Hattangadi Vs. Pest Control (India) Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. (1995) 1 SCC 551 being relevant is extracted herein below:
"9. Broadly speaking while fixing an amount of compensation payable to a victim of an accident, the damages have to be assessed separately as pecuniary damages and special damages. Pecuniary damages are those which the victim has actually incurred and which are capable of being calculated in terms of money; whereas non-pecuniary damages are those which are incapable of being assessed by arithmetical calculations. In order to appreciate two concepts pecuniary damages may include expenses incurred by the claimant: (i) medical attendance; (ii) loss of earning of profit up to the date of trial; (iii) other material loss. So far non-pecuniary damages are concerned, they may include (i) damages for mental and physical shock, pain and suffering, already suffered or likely to be suffered in future; (ii) damages to compensate for the loss of amenities of life which may include a variety of matters i.e. on account of injury the claimant may not be able to walk, run or sit; (iii) damages for the loss of expectation of life, i.e., on account of injury the normal longevity of the person concerned is shortened; (iv) inconvenience, hardship, discomfort, disappointment, frustration and mental stress in life."
26. Heads of compensation under pecuniary and non- pecuniary damages have been further explained by Hon'ble Apex MACT No. 1241/2016 Gaurav Vs. Ramesh Dutt & Ors Page No. 9 of 23 Court in para 6 of Raj Kumar Vs. Ajay Kumar & Anr. (2011) 1 SCC 343 which reads as under:
"6. The heads under which compensation is awarded in personal injury cases are the following :
Pecuniary damages (Special Damages)
(i) Expenses relating to treatment, hospitalization, medicines, transportation, nourishing food, and miscellaneous expenditure.
(ii) Loss of earnings (and other gains) which the injured would have made had he not been injured, comprising :
(a) Loss of earning during the period of treatment;
(b) Loss of future earnings on account of permanent disability.
(iii) Future medical expenses.
Non-pecuniary damages (General
Damages)
(iv) Damages for pain, suffering and trauma as a consequence of the injuries.
(v) Loss of amenities (and/or loss of prospects of marriage).
(vi) Loss of expectation of life (shortening of normal longevity).
In routine personal injury cases, compensation will be awarded only under heads (i), (ii)(a) and (iv). It is only in serious cases of injury, where there is specific medical evidence corroborating the evidence of the claimant, that compensation will be granted under any of the heads (ii)(b), (iii),
(v) and (vi) relating to loss of future earnings on account of permanent disability, future medical expenses, loss of amenities (and/or loss of prospects of marriage) and loss of expectation of life.
MACT No. 1241/2016 Gaurav Vs. Ramesh Dutt & Ors Page No. 10 of 23 NATURE AND EXTENT OF INJURIES
27. Discharge Summary of Sir Ganga Ram Hospital read with and Scout Screening of Brachial Plexus reveal diffuse contusion injury to the right side of the neck particularly in the supraclavicular region with injury to the vertebrae, the spinal cord, nerve root avulsion and brachial plexus cord and divisions.
28. No other document has been filed on record or relied in evidence to show any other injury.
MEDICINES AND TREATMENT
29. PW-1 Sh. Gaurav in para 5 of affidavit Ex.PW-1/A has deposed to have spent Rs.2,00,000/- on treatment, however, no bill/invoice/cash receipt has been adduced along with Treatment Record Mark-A. Injured Gaurav is therefore not entitled to be compensated for pecuniary loss against medicines and treatment in the absence of bill verifying expenses incurred on treatment. CONVEYANCE AND SPECIAL DIET
30. As averred in para 5 of affidavit Ex.PW-1/A, a sum of Rs.20,000/-each has been spent on conveyance and special diet. However, no bill/document verifying such expenses has been adduced in evidence. Treatment Record Mark-A reveal that injured having met with accident near Shahi Villa, G.T. Road, Muthal, Sonipat, Haryana on 10.11.2012 was shifted to Government Hospital, Sonipat by Highway Ambulance and thereafter got treated for injuries at Jaipur Golden Hospital, Delhi and Sir Ganga Ram Hospital, New Delhi where he remained hospitalized from 11.11.2012 to 23.11.2012. It is assumed that injured might have hired private vehicle/taxi for undergoing treatment at aforesaid hospitals. A sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees MACT No. 1241/2016 Gaurav Vs. Ramesh Dutt & Ors Page No. 11 of 23 Twenty Thousand only) is therefore awarded towards conveyance. Similarly, injured might have needed special diet for full and complete recovery from head injury with multiple contusion sustained in road accident. A sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only) is therefore awarded towards special diet on conservative estimate.
ATTENDANT CHARGES
31. As averred in para 5 of affidavit Ex.PW-1/A, injured Gaurav has spent Rs.50,000/- as attendant charges. However, no bill and/or documentary proof has been filed on record verifying such expenses. Nevertheless, it is assumed that injured Gaurav having suffered Brachial Plexus with Monoplegia consequent to head injury must have needed an attendant to assist him for at least four months even if such gratuitous service was rendered by some or the other of his family/relatives. Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in Delhi Transport Corporation and Anr. Vs. Kumari Lalita 1982 SCC Online Delhi 123 has held that the victim cannot be deprived of compensation towards gratuitous service rendered by some of his family member. Accordingly, in the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of material on record, injured Raj Kumar shall be entitled to an amount of Rs.8,000/- x 4 = Rs.32,000/- (Rupees Thirty Two Thousand only) towards attendant charges.
LOSS OF INCOME
32. PW-1 Sh. Gaurav in para 4 of affidavit Ex.PW-1/A has claimed monthly income Rs.15,000/- to Rs.20,000/- by running part time tuition centre in the name of M/s Gaurav Tuition Centre. However, no documentary proof verifying monthly MACT No. 1241/2016 Gaurav Vs. Ramesh Dutt & Ors Page No. 12 of 23 income has been adduced in evidence. Since Certificate-cum- Mark-sheet of Senior Secondary and Mark-sheet of CBSE has been proved as Ex.PW-1/1 so monthly income of Gaurav is taken as per minimum wage of 'matriculate' @ Rs.8,814/- applicable in Delhi w.e.f. 01.10.2012.
33. Having suffered Brachial Plexus with Monoplegia consequent to head injury, it is presumed that injured Gaurav would have taken around four months to recover from injuries sustained in road accident. Petitioner Gaurav shall therefore be entitled to Rs.8,814/- x 04 months = Rs.35,256/- (Rupees Thirty Five Thousand Two Hundred Fifty Six only) towards loss of earning in course of treatment.
PAIN AND SUFFERING
34. Following factors are to be taken into account for assessing compensation under the head - Pain and Suffering:
(a) Nature of injury
(b) Parts of body where injuries occurred
(c) Surgeries, if any
(d) Confinement in hospital
(e) Duration of the treatment
35. Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in para 9 of Arvind Kumar Mishra Vs. New India Assurance Co. Ltd. & Anr. (2010) 10 SCC 254 has observed that whole idea in case of assessment of all damages for personal injury is to put the claimant in the same position as he was insofar as money can. Perfect compensation is hardly possible but one has to keep in mind that the victim has done no wrong; he has suffered at the MACT No. 1241/2016 Gaurav Vs. Ramesh Dutt & Ors Page No. 13 of 23 hands of wrongdoer and Court must take care to give him full and fair compensation for that he had suffered.
36. In the instant case, injured Gaurav having sustained grievous injury in motor vehicle accident on 10.11.2012 got treated for injuries at Jaipur Golden Hospital, Delhi and Sir Ganga Ram Hospital, New Delhi where he remained hospitalized from 11.11.2012 to 23.11.2012 whereas Disability Certificate No.JSSHS/PWD/2019/506 dated 09.08.2019 issued by Disability Board, Janak Puri, Super Specialty Hospital mentions injured as case of Post Traumatic Brachial Plexus Injury with Monoplegia (right side) resulting in 50% permanent disability.
37. Hence, considering the nature of injury, treatment and permanent disability consequent to motor vehicle accident, it would be apposite to award a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) towards Pain & Suffering.
LOSS OF AMENITIES AND LIFE
38. Facts of the present case disclose that petitioner Gaurav having suffered Brachial Plexus with Monoplegia consequent to head injury has been assessed with permanent physical disability of 50% (Fifty Percent) in relation to right upper limb. Since injured Sh. Gaurav was around 19 years of age at the time of accident whereas permanent physical disability of 50% in relation to right upper limb is likely to affect his overall health, quality of life and lifestyle, so in the facts of the present case and in view of law laid down in Rekha Jain Vs. National Insurance Co. Ltd. (2013) 8 SCC 389, a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) is awarded as compensation towards loss of enjoyment of life and amenities, in addition to Rs.50,000/-
MACT No. 1241/2016 Gaurav Vs. Ramesh Dutt & Ors Page No. 14 of 23 (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) as compensation for mental & physical shock consequent to injury sustained in road traffic accident.
LOSS OF FUTURE INCOME/PROSPECTS
39. Disability Certificate Ex.PW-2/1 has been issued by the Disability Board, Janak Puri Super Specialty Hospital describing injured Sh. Gaurav as Post Traumatic Brachial Plexus Injury with Monoplegia (right side) resulting in 50% permanent disability.
40. Advocate Ms. Sunanda Nimisha for insurance company has vehemently argued against 50% permanent disability by adverting to Discharge Summary of J.P.N. Apex Trauma Centre, AIIMS w.r.t. self inflicted injury sustained in right wrist on 03.05.2013 around 06 months after Head Injury and Brachial Plexus caused in motor vehicle accident on 10.11.2012.
41. I have considered her submissions and perused Permanent Disability Certificate along with Discharge Summary of J.P.N. Apex Trauma Centre dated 03.05.2013. It is well settled law that percentage of loss of earning capacity arising from permanent disability will be different from the percentage of permanent disability and ascertainment of the effect of permanent disability on the actual earning capacity would involve three steps as laid down in para 13 of the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India titled Raj Kumar Vs. Ajay Kumar (Supra).
42. What is required to be assessed by the Tribunal is the effect of the permanent disability on the earning capacity of the injured and after assessing the loss of earning capacity in terms of percentage of the income, it has to be quantified in terms of money to arrive at the future loss of earning by applying the MACT No. 1241/2016 Gaurav Vs. Ramesh Dutt & Ors Page No. 15 of 23 standard multiplier method used to determine the loss of dependency as held in para 11 of aforesaid judgment titled Raj Kumar Vs. Ajay Kumar (Supra).
43. Considering age, avocation and ability to carry on some other or lesser scale of activities, this Court is of the opinion that permanent physical disability of 50% in relation to right upper limb could have resulted in 20% functional disability towards loss of earning capacity of injured.
44. Petitioner Gaurav being 18 years 11 months & 19 day old (as per copy of Aadhar Card Ex.PW-1/2) will be entitled to loss of future income by applying multiplier of 18 in addition to future prospect @ 40% upon his established income Rs.8,814/- in terms of principles laid down in National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi, (2017) 16 SCC 680.
45. Loss of future income is calculated as - Rs.8,814/- x 140/100 x 12 x 18 x 20/100 = Rs.5,33,070.72/- rounded off to Rs.5,33,071/- (Rupees Five Lakh Thirty Three Thousand Seventy One only). Petitioner Sh. Gaurav is therefore awarded Rs.5,33,071/- towards loss of future income/prospects.
46. Break-up of compensation awarded to injured under pecuniary and non-pecuniary heads is mentioned below in tabulated form:
S. No. HEADS AMOUNT (in
Rupees)
1. Medicines & Treatment Nil
2. Conveyance Rs.20,000/-
3. Special Diet Rs.20,000/-
4. Attendant Charges (Rs.8,000 x 4) Rs.32,000/-
MACT No. 1241/2016 Gaurav Vs. Ramesh Dutt & Ors Page No. 16 of 23
5. Loss of Income (Rs.8,814 x 4) Rs.32,256/-
6. Pain & Suffering Rs.1,00,000/-
7. Loss of amenities of life Rs.1,00,000/-
8. Mental & Physical Shock Rs.50,000/-
9 Loss of future income/prospect Rs.5,33,071/-
TOTAL Rs.8,87,327/- INTEREST
47. There is nothing on record to justify withholding interest on the award amount. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the present case, it will be just and proper to award interest @ 7.5% per annum on the award amount as granted by Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Mannat Johar & Anr. (2019) 15 SCC
260. Injured is therefore awarded interest @ 7.5% per annum upon award amount Rs.8,87,327/- from the date of filing of claim petition on 10.09.2015 till notice of deposit under Order XXI Rule 1 CPC to petitioner/counsel.
LIABILITY
48. Advocate Ms. Sunanda Nimisha for Liberty General Insurance Co. has adverted to para 2 of affidavit Ex.PW-1/A read with testimony of PW-1 Gaurav recorded during cross- examination wherein injured has deposed to be riding motorcycle along with Manish and Sandeep on their way to Kurar from village Bhigan besides conceding that all three of them were not wearing helmets at the time of accident.
49. Injured Gaurav riding the pillion along with two other persons without protective headgear (helmet) in violation of MACT No. 1241/2016 Gaurav Vs. Ramesh Dutt & Ors Page No. 17 of 23 sections 128 & 129 of M.V. Act is guilty of contributory negligence in the ratio 10:90 vis a vis R1/Ramesh Dutt driving offending Three Wheeler Auto No.HR-69-7518 involved in the accident. Injured Gaurav would therefore entitled to receive 90% of compensation for head injury with multiple contusions sustained in motor vehicle accident.
50. R1/Ramesh Dutt being Principal Tortfeasor driving Three Wheeler Auto No.HR-69-7518 rashly and negligently resulting in accident and R2/Ram Dhari (owner) being vicariously liable for the act of the driver are jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation. However, since offending vehicle was insured against Third Party Risk so, R3/Future Generali India Insurance Co. Ltd. being statutorily liable under Section 149 (1) of M. V. Act shall pay the award amount along with interest to injured in the absence of any statutory defence under section 149(2) of M.V. Act.
51. FINDING : Issue No.2 is decided accordingly by holding that R3/Future Generali India Insurance Co. Ltd. will pay 90% of Rs.8,87,327/- i.e. Rs.7,98,594.30/- rounded off to Rs.7,98,600/- along with interest @ 7.5 % per annum to injured Sh. Gaurav. RELIEF
52. In view of foregoing discussion and observations and having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, award for a sum of Rs.7,98,600/- along with interest @ 7.5% p.a. from the date of filing of claim petition on 10.09.2015 till notice of deposit under Order XXI Rule 1 CPC is passed in favour of injured Gaurav.
53. FORM-IVB MACT No. 1241/2016 Gaurav Vs. Ramesh Dutt & Ors Page No. 18 of 23 SUMMARY OF THE COMPUTATION OF AWARD AMOUNT IN INJURY CASE TO BE INCORPORATED IN THE AWARD
1. Date of accident : 10.11.2012
2. Name of the injured : Sh. Gaurav
3. Age of the injured : 19 years (at the time of accident)
4. Occupation of the injured : Private Service
5. Income of the injured : Rs.8,814/- (minimum wage of 'matriculate' @ Rs.8,814/-
applicable in Delhi w.e.f.
01.10.2012)
6. Nature of injury : Grievous
7. Medical treatment taken : Jaipur Golden Hospital, Delhi & by the injured Sir Ganga Ram Hospital, New Delhi.
8. Period of hospitalization : 11.11.2012 to 23.11.2012
9. Whether any permanent : Yes.
disability? If yes, give details.
10. Computation of Compensation S. No. Heads Awarded by the Tribunal
11. Pecuniary Loss:
(i) Expenditure on treatment Nil
(ii) Expenditure on conveyance Rs.20,000/-
(iii) Expenditure on special diet Rs.20,000/-
(iv) Cost of nursing/attendant Rs.32,000/-
(v) Cost of artificial limb -
MACT No. 1241/2016 Gaurav Vs. Ramesh Dutt & Ors Page No. 19 of 23
(vi) Loss of earning capacity 20%-
(vii) Loss of income (four months) Rs.32,256/-
(viii) Any other loss which may require -
any special treatment or aid to the
injured for the rest of her life
12. Non-Pecuniary Loss:
(i) Compensation for mental and Rs.50,000/-
physical shock
(ii) Pain and suffering Rs.1,00,000/-
(iii) Loss of amenities of life Rs.1,00,000/-
(iv) Disfiguration -
(v) Loss of marriage prospects -
(vi) Loss of earning, inconvenience, -
hardship, disappointment,
frustration, mental stress,
dejectment and unhappiness in
future life etc.
13. Disability resulting in loss of earning capacity:
(i) Percentage of disability assessed 50%-
and nature of disability as permanent or temporary
(ii) Loss of amenities of loss of -
expectation of life span on account of disability
(iii) Percentage of loss of earning 20%-
capacity in relation to disability
(iv) Loss of future Income - (Income x Rs.5,33,071/-
% Earning Capacity x Multiplier)
14. TOTAL COMPENSATION Rs.7,98,600/-
being 90% of
Rs.8,67,513/- in
view of
contributory
MACT No. 1241/2016 Gaurav Vs. Ramesh Dutt & Ors Page No. 20 of 23
negligence
15. INTEREST AWARDED
16. Interest amount up to the date of @ 7.5% p.a. from
award the date of filing
of DAR i.e.
10.09.2015 till
notice of deposit
under Order XXI
Rule 1 CPC
17. Total amount including interest Rs.7,98,600/- +
interest @ 7.5%
p.a. from the date
of filing of the
DAR i.e.
10.09.2015 till
notice of deposit
under Order XXI
Rule 1 CPC
18. Award amont released As per table given
below
19. Award amount kept in FDRs As per table given
below
20. Mode of disbursement of the By credit in the
award amount to the claimant(s). SB Account of the
injured
21 Next Date for compliance of the 22.11.2024
award.
54. The award amount shall be deposited by R3/Future Generali India Insurance Co. Ltd. in Account No.42709452600 of MACT, South West, Dwarka Courts, New Delhi at State Bank of India, District Court Complex, Sector-10, Dwarka, New Delhi (IFSC Code SBIN0011566 and MICR Code 110002483) through RTGS/NEFT/IMPS within 30 days of award as per section MACT No. 1241/2016 Gaurav Vs. Ramesh Dutt & Ors Page No. 21 of 23 168(3) of M.V. Act under intimation to the Nazir of this court with proof of notice to the claimant/injured and his counsel.
55. Statement of injured Sh. Gaurav regarding financial status, needs and liabilities has been recorded. In view of the said statement and having regard to the facts and circumstances of the present case, the award amount shall be disbursed in following manner:
S. Name Status Amount of Release Amou
N Award Amount nt of
o FDR
1. Sh. Injured Rs.7,98,600/- + Rs.7,98,600/- Nil
Gaurav interest @ 7.5% - with
p.a. from the proportionate
date of filing of interest in
the DAR i.e. MACT
10.09.2015 till Claims SB
notice of deposit Account of
under Order injured
XXI Rule 1
CPC
TOTAL Rs.7,98,600/- Rs.7,98,600/-
56. The above-said compensation shall be disbursed through Motor Accident Claims Annuity Deposit Scheme (MACAD Scheme) formulated vide Orders dated 01.05.2018 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.).
57. Sh. Gaurav has mentioned details of SB Account No.7673000100046082 with Punjab National Bank, Murthal, District Sonipat, Haryana (IFSC Code: PUNB0767300) in his MACT No. 1241/2016 Gaurav Vs. Ramesh Dutt & Ors Page No. 22 of 23 statement recorded on 02.11.2022 and it is requested that cash amount may be transferred in the said SB Account.
58. Accordingly, Manager, State Bank of India, District Courts Complex, Sector-10, Dwarka, New Delhi is directed to transfer Rs.7,98,600/- with proportionate interest in SB Account No.7673000100046082 with Punjab National Bank, Murthal, District Sonipat, Haryana (IFSC Code: PUNB0767300).
59. R3/Future Generali India Insurance Co. Ltd. shall inform the petitioner/injured and his counsel through registered post regarding award amount being transferred/deposited in MACT Account so as to facilitate the petitioner/ injured to know about the deposit in the account.
60. Copy of this award be sent to the concerned Manager, SBI, District Courts Complex, Sector-10, Dwarka, New Delhi and Punjab National Bank, Murthal, District Sonipat, Haryana (IFSC Code: PUNB0767300) for information /compliance.
61. Dasti copy of award be given to Ld. Counsel for injured and Ld. Counsel for R3/Future Generali India Insurance Co. Ltd.
62. Ahlmad is directed to prepare separate miscellaneous file to be listed on 22.11.2024 for filing compliance report.
63. File be consigned to the record room.
Announced in the open Court Digitally signed
on 19.10.2024 TARUN by TARUN
YOGESH
YOGESH Date: 2024.10.26
17:50:25 +0530
(Tarun Yogesh)
PO, MACT-01, Dwarka Courts,
New Delhi
MACT No. 1241/2016 Gaurav Vs. Ramesh Dutt & Ors Page No. 23 of 23