Delhi District Court
Faimida & Ors. vs . Manoj & Ors. on 31 May, 2022
IN THE COURT OF MS. MANJUSHA WADHWA
PRESIDING OFFICER : MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL,
PATIALA HOUSE COURTS, NEW DELHI
IN THE MATTER OF:
FAIMIDA & ORS. VS. MANOJ & ORS.
MACP NO. 150/18
1. Smt. Faimida
W/o Late Sher Mohd.
2. Mursalim
S/o Late Sher Mohd.
Minor petitioner no. 2 through natural guardian/mother
R/o H.No. 231, Dehra, Dhaulana, Hapur, U.P-245301.
......Petitioners/claimants
Versus
1. Sh. Manoj (Driver)
S/o Sh. Pooran Singh,
R/o Village Nagla Dhaukal,
Post Jaithara, District Etah,
U.P.
2. Sh. Vishal Kumar (Owner)
Sh. Yashpal Kumar,
R/o H.No. 72 CDA, LIG Flat,
Madhuban Enclave, Madipur,
Delhi-110063.
3. M/s United Insurance Company Ltd. (Insurer)
Kanchanjunga Building, Door No. 18,
Floor No. 8, Barakhamba Road,
New Delhi-110001. .........Respondents
MACP No. 150/18 Page no.1 of 18
Date of filing of claim petition : 20.08.2018
Date of framing of issues : 31.01.2020
Date of concluding arguments : 26.05.2022
Date of decision : 31.05.2022
AWARD/JUDGMENT
1. The claim for compensation raised in this claim petition is in respect of fatal injuries alleged to have been suffered by Late Sh. Wahid (hereinafter referred to as the 'deceased') in a road accident that took place on 08.05.2017 at 10 am, Near Atma Ram Steel Tiraha, NH-24, PS Kavi Nagar, District Ghaziabad, U.P., regarding which one FIR bearing No.0668/2017, under Sections 279/338/304-A/427 IPC was registered at PS Kavi Nagar, Ghaziabad. The offending vehicle involved in this case is a TATA 407 Truck bearing registration No. DL-1LW-8404 which at the relevant time of accident was being driven by respondent no.1 (R-1), owned by respondent no. 2 (R-2) and insured with respondent no. 3 (R-3).
2. Succinctly put, facts of the case as per claim petition are that the claimants are mother and brother of the deceased. On the above said date and time, the deceased was travelling along with his uncle Sh. Zulfikar in a tractor bearing registration No. UP-15T-8507 from Lal Kuan, Ghaziabad to their residence in Dehra, Hapur. When they reached Aatma Ram Steel Tiraha, NH-24, a TATA 407 Truck bearing registration No. DL- 1LW-8404, which was being driven by respondent no.1 in a rash and negligent manner, came from behind and hit the tractor, due to which the deceased sustained serious injuries. It is further stated that after the accident, the deceased was removed to Sarvodaya Hospital where he died after one and half hour due to the aforesaid accidental injuries.
3. The respondent nos.1&2 have filed joint written statement/reply wherein it is stated that false case has been registered MACP No. 150/18 Page no.2 of 18 against them by the police officials of PS Ghaziabad. It is further stated that respondent no.1 was having a valid driving license at the time of accident. It is further stated that the accident took place due to rash and negligent driving of the tractor, and thus, they are not liable to pay any compensation to the petitioners. It is also stated that the offending vehicle was insured with United India Insurance Company at the time of accident.
4. Perusal of record shows that vide order dated 15.12.2018, respondent no. 3 was directed to file written statement within 30 days and the matter was posted for 21.02.2019. However, none appeared for the respondent no. 2 and respondent no. 3/insurance company on 21.02.2019, which led to passing of exparte order against them on the said date itself. The said exparte order was set aside against respondent no. 3 /insurance Company on 21.02.2019 itself, as Sh. Ashutosh Upadhyay, Advocate for respondent no. 3 entered appearance later after the matter was over. Further, vide order dated 02.05.2019, ex-parte order qua respondent no. 2 was recalled on the application.
5. It is pertinent to mention herein that an application under order 1 rule 10(2) CPC was moved on behalf of respondent no. 3 seeking deletion of its name on the ground that the offending vehicle was not insured with the company. The aforesaid application was dismissed vide order dated 16.07.2019, with the observation that the said plea appears to have been made while taking the date of accident as 08.05.2018 as given in column 9 of the petition, whereas actual date of the accident is 08.05.2017 and copy of insurance policy which is on record shows that insurance was valid from 23.03.2017 to 22.03.2018. Vide the same order, respondent no. 3/insurance company was given 30 days' time to file written statement and a formal application for correction of date of MACP No. 150/18 Page no.3 of 18 accident in the petition was directed to be moved. Thereafter, an application under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC was moved on behalf of the petitioner seeking correction in the date of accident and the same was allowed vide order dated 31.01.2020 and the amended petition filed along with application was taken on record. On 21.05.2022, Respondent nos.1 and 2 were proceeded ex-parte. Though there is no formal exparte order against the respondent no. 3/insurance company after recalling of exparte order on 21.02.2019 itself, respondent no. 3 is being considered as exparte from 31.10.2019 onwards. Further, insurance company failed to file written statement in the present case despite grant of 30 days' time vide order dated 16.07.2019.
6. On 31.01.2020, following issues were framed by the Ld. Predecessor of this Court as:-
1. Whether Sh. Wahid sustained fatal injuries in the accident which occurred on 08.05.2017, at about 10 AM, Near Atma Ram Steel Tiraha, NH-24, PS Kavi Nagar, District Ghaziabad, U.P. caused by rash and negligent driving of vehicle No. DL-
1LW-8404 being driven by respondent no. 1, owned by respondent no. 2 and insured with respondent no. 3? OPP.
2. Whether the petitioners are entitled for compensation? If so, to what amount and from whom?
3.Relief.
7. Heard arguments advanced by Ms. Priyanka Sethia, Advocate for the petitioners. The respondents are already exparte in the present case. This Tribunal has carefully perused the entire record of the case. The finding on the aforesaid issues is stated hereinafter in the succeeding paragraphs.
ISSUE NO. 11. Whether Sh. Wahid sustained fatal injuries in the accident which occurred on 08.05.2017, at about 10 AM, Near Atma MACP No. 150/18 Page no.4 of 18 Ram Steel Tiraha, NH-24, PS Kavi Nagar, District Ghaziabad, U.P. caused by rash and negligent driving of vehicle No. DL- 1LW-8404 being driven by respondent no. 1, owned by respondent no. 2 and insured with respondent no. 3? OPP.
8. Onus to prove this issue was upon the petitioner. The first question that needs to be decided as to whether the accident was caused by vehicle bearing registration No. DL-1LW-8404. In order to prove the same, the petitioners have examined Sh. Julfikar, an eye witness of the accident as PW2 who tendered his evidence by way of affidavit as Ex. PW2/A. He deposed that on the date of accident, he was travelling with his nephew Abdul Wahid on tractor bearing registration No. UP-15T-8507 from Lal Kuan, Ghaziabad to his residence in Dehra, Hapur. He further deposed that when their tractor reached Aatma Ram Steel Tiraha, a TATA 407 Truck bearing registration No. DL-1LW-8404, which was being driven by respondent no.1 in a rash and negligent manner, came from behind and hit the tractor, which caused severe injuries to his nephew Abdul Wahid and he was rushed to Sarvodya Hospital where he died.
9. The aforesaid testimony of eye witness remained unrebutted as the Respondents neither appeared nor cross examined him on any aspect. It is explicit from the testimony of PW-2 Julfikar that occurrence of accident has not been disputed and the testimony of the witness in this regard has gone unrebutted. The testimony of PW-2 has been duly corroborated with the criminal case record. Moreover, it has not been disputed that respondent no. 1 has been charge-sheeted in the aforesaid FIR for offences punishable under Sections 279/338/304-A/427 IPC for rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle. The Hon'ble Apex Court in Mangla Ram Vs. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. & Ors., 2018 Law Suit (SC) 303 has observed that filing of charge sheet against the driver MACP No. 150/18 Page no.5 of 18 prima facie points towards his complicity in driving the vehicle rashly and negligently. It has been further observed that even when the accused were to be acquitted in the criminal case, the same may be of no effect on the assessment of the liability required in respect of motor accident cases by the Tribunal.
10. Pertinently, Respondent no. 1 himself was the best witness who could have stepped into the witness box to rebut his involvement in the aforesaid accident, which he has failed to do. Therefore, an adverse inference is drawn against the respondent no. 1/driver in terms of judgment of Hon'ble High Court of Delhi passed in the case of Cholamandalam M.S. General Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Kamlesh, reported in 2009 (3) AD (Delhi) 310.
11. 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 on preponderance of probabilities and not beyond reasonable doubt, as are required in a criminal prosecution. Reference in this regard is made to the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court reported as (2009) 13 SC 530 in Bimla Devi and others Vs. Himachal Road Transport Corporation and others, wherein it has been observed that strict proof of an accident caused by a particular vehicle in a particular manner may not be possible to be done by the claimants and the claimants were merely to establish their case on the touchstone of preponderance of probability.
12. In view of foregoing discussion, it stands proved on preponderance of probabilities that the aforesaid accident took place due to rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle bearing registration no. DL-1LW-8404 and the said vehicle at that time was being driven by respondent no. 1, owned by respondent no. 2 and insured with respondent no. 3. Hence, this issue is decided in favour MACP No. 150/18 Page no.6 of 18 of the petitioners and against the respondents.
ISSUE NO. 2Whether the petitioners are entitled for compensation? If so, to what amount and from whom?
13. As rashness and negligence on part of driver of the offending vehicle/respondent no. 1 has been proved, the petitioners have become entitled to be compensation for death of their family member in the said accident, but the computation of compensation and liability to pay the same are required to be decided.
14. The petitioner no. 1 being mother of the deceased has stepped into the witness box as PW1 and filed her evidence by way of affidavit as Ex. PW-1/A wherein she has claimed that her deceased son was 19 years old at the time of his death. She has further deposed that her deceased son was studying in XIth class and was earning Rs. 15,000/- per month by imparting tuitions. She has further deposed that after completing education, he would have been able to get a job in reputed company and earn salary of Rs. 1,00,000/- per month.
15. In order to prove the age of the deceased, PW-1 has tendered copy of class Xth Admit card of the deceased as Ex. PW1/6. As per Ex. PW-1/6, date of birth of the deceased is 20.11.2000, and thus, age of the deceased at the time of accident i.e. 08.05.2017 was around 16½ years. Regarding income, besides bald testimony of PW-1 Faimida, there is no other oral or documentary evidence to show that the deceased used to impart tuitions and earn around Rs. 15,000/- per month. Even otherwise, being a minor at the time of accident, it is improbable unless proved otherwise that the deceased was earning the aforesaid amount. In view thereof, notional earning of the deceased is required to be ascertained for calculating the loss of dependency.
MACP No. 150/18 Page no.7 of 18
16. In the Second Schedule appended to the Motor Vehicles Act (the M.V. Act), as it stood prior to the amendment in year 2018, notional earning of a person who was not having any actual earning, except a spouse, was given as Rs.15,000/- per annum with reference to a claim raised under Section 163A of the said Act on the basis of structured formula, and the same was adopted in some cases of fault liability under Section 166 of the Act as well.
17. In the case of Chetan Malhotra Vs. Lala Ram & Ors., MAC App. No. 554/10, decided by the Hon'ble High court on 13.05.2016, not only the entire existing law on the subject was discussed, but it was also laid down that such notional earning to be presumed or taken in respect of children should also take into calculation the effect of Cost Inflation index (CII) as well as the composite non pecuniary damages taking care of not only of the conventional heads but also the future prospects as awarded in the celebrated case of R.K. Malik Vs. Kiran Pal (2009) 14 SCC 1. The relevant observations made by his lordship and the formula given for calculation of compensation in case of death of a child in the above said case is as under :-
"71. Subject to all other requisite conditions being fulfilled, for the foregoing reasons, in order to bring about consistency and uniformity in approach to the issue, it is held that claims for compensation on account of death of children shall be determined as follows :
(i) Till such time as the law is amended by the legislature, or the Central Government notifies the amendment to the Second Schedule in exercise of the enabling power vested in it by Section 163-A (3) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, and except in cases wherein the prospects of employability and earnings (in future or present) of the deceased child are proved by cogent and irrefutable evidence, this having regard, inter alia, to the academic record or training in special talents or skills, for computing the pecuniary damages on account of the loss to estate, the notional income of non-earning MACP No. 150/18 Page no.8 of 18 persons (`15000/- p.a.) as specified in the Second Schedule (brought in force from 14.11.1994), shall be assumed to be the income of the deceased child, and taken into account after it is inflation- corrected with the help of Cost Inflation Index (CII) as notified by the Government of India from year to year under Section 48 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, by applying the formula indicated hereinafter.
(ii) For inflation-correction, the financial year of 1997-
1998 shall be treated as the "base year" and the value of the notional income relevant to the date of cause of action shall be computed in the following manner:-
[15,000/- x A ÷331 [wherein the figure of „`15,000/-‟ represents the notional income specified in the second schedule requiring inflation-correction; "A‟ represents the CII for the financial year in which the cause of action arose (i.e. the accident / death occurred); and the figure of "331‟ represents the CII for the "base year‟]
(iii) After arriving at an appropriate figure of the present equivalent value of the notional income (i.e. inflation-
corrected amount), it shall be rounded off to a figure in next thousands of rupees.
(iv) The amount of notional income thus calculated shall be reduced to two- third, the deduction to the extent of one-third being towards personal & living expenses of the deceased, the balance taken as the annual loss to estate (hereinafter also referred to as "the multiplicand").
(v) For assessment of the pecuniary damages on account of the death of children upto the age of 10 years, the loss to estate shall be calculated, capitalizing the multiplicand, by applying the multiplier of ten (10).
(vi) For children of the age-group of more than 10 years upto 15 years, the loss to estate shall be calculated by applying the multiplier of fifteen (15).
(vii) For children of the age-group of more than 15 years but less than 18 years, the loss to estate shall be calculated by applying the multiplier of eighteen (18).
MACP No. 150/18 Page no.9 of 18
(viii) After the pecuniary loss to estate has been worked out in the manner indicated above, an amount equivalent to the amount thus computed shall be added to it as the composite non-pecuniary damages taking care of not only the conventional heads but also towards future prospects as awarded in R.K. Malik v. Kiran Pal (2009) 14 SCC 1.
(ix) The final sum thus arrived at, appropriately rounded off, if so required to the nearest (if not next) thousands of rupees, shall be awarded as compensation for the death of the child."
94. The cause of action arose on 09.04.2011. Thus, CII for the financial year 2011-12 (i.e. 785) would be invoked. The inflation- corrected income comes to (₹15,000 x 785 / 331) ₹35,574/-, rounded off to ₹36,000/-. After deducting 1/3rd towards personal and living expenses, the annual pecuniary loss to estate comes to (₹36,000/- x 2 / 3) ₹24,000/-. As the age of the deceased was 14 years, the multiplier of 15 applies. Therefore, the total pecuniary loss to estate is calculated as (₹24,000/- x 15) ₹3,60,000/-. Adding an identical sum towards composite non-pecuniary damages, the total compensation in the case is calculated as (₹3,60,000/- x
2) ₹7,20,000/-. It shall carry interest as levied (9%) by the tribunal. The award is modified accordingly.
18. Adverting to the facts of the present case, it is necessary to find out the cost inflation index for the financial year 2017-18. Ld. Counsel for petitioner has placed on record one notification bearing No. 2336 (E) No. 73/2021 (F.No. 370142/10/2021-TPL) dated 15.06.2021 showing the cost inflation index for the financial years from 2001-2002 to 2021-2022 as amended by Finance Act, 2022. As per this notification, cost inflation index for the financial year 2001-02 shall be considered as base year which is 100 and cost inflation index for the financial year 2017-2018 is 272. Thus, the inflation-corrected income comes to Rs. 40,800/- (Rs. 15,000 x 272/100). After deducting 1/3rd towards personal and living expenses, the annual pecuniary loss to estate comes to Rs. 27,200/- (Rs. 40,800/- x MACP No. 150/18 Page no.10 of 18 2/3). As the age of the deceased was more than 15 years and less than 18 years, the multiplier of 18 is applicable. Therefore, the total pecuniary loss to estate is calculated as Rs.4,89,600/- (Rs. 27,200 x 18). Adding an identical sum towards composite non-pecuniary damages, the total compensation in the case is calculated as Rs. 9,79,200/- (Rs.4,89,600/- x
2).
ISSUE NO.3/RELIEF
19. In view of finding on issue number 2, the petitioners are held entitled to a sum of Rs. 9,79,200/- (Rupees Nine Lakhs Seventy Nine Thousand Two Hundred only) along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of DAR. However, it is directed that the amount of interim award and interest for the suspended period, if any, during the course of this inquiry, shall be liable to be excluded from the award amount.
APPORTIONMENT
20. PW1 Faimida in her evidence by way of affidavit Ex. PW1/A has claimed that she and her younger son Mursalimm, i.e. petitioner no. 2 were both dependent upon the income of deceased. Therefore, both the petitioners are considered as dependents upon the deceased. Perusal of Aadhar card of petitioner no. 2 Ex. PW1/7 (OSR) shows that date of birth of petitioner no. 2 is 02.02.2001 and thus, the petitioner no. 2 has attained age of majority. Keeping in view that the petitioner no. 2 has become major, 80% share is being awarded to petitioner no. 1, i.e. mother of deceased and the remaining 20% share is being awarded to petitioner no. 2, i.e. brother of the deceased.
RELEASE
21. Out of amount awarded to petitioner no. 1, 75% amount is directed to be kept with UCO Bank, Patiala House Court, New Delhi in the Motor Accident Claims Annuity Deposit (MACAD) in form of 75 MACP No. 150/18 Page no.11 of 18 monthly fixed deposit receipts (FDRs) of equal amounts for a period of 1 to 75 months in succession, as per scheme formulated by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court vide order dated 01.05.2018 in FAO No. 842/2003, titled as Rajesh Tyagi & Ors. Vs. Jaibir Singh & Ors. and as implemented vide subsequent order dated 07.12.2018 and order dated 08.01.2021 passed in the said case. The amount of FDRs on maturity would be released in her savings/MACT Claims SB Account opened/to be opened near the placed of her residence, as directed vide order dated 08.10.2018 and the remaining 25% amount is also directed to be released into her above said account, which can be withdrawn through withdrawal form and utilized by her.
22. Out of amount awarded to petitioner no. 2, 50% amount is directed to be kept with UCO Bank, Patiala House Court, New Delhi in FDR for a period of one year. The amount of FDR on maturity would be released in his savings bank account opened/to be opened near the placed of his residence, as directed vide order dated 08.10.2018 and the remaining 50% amount is also directed to be released into his above said account, which can be withdrawn through withdrawal form and utilized by him.
23. The disbursement to the petitioners is, however, subject to addition of future interest till deposit proportionately and also deduction of proportionate tax on the interest amount or amount of interim award, if any, to/from their shares.
24. The bank shall not permit any joint names to be added in the savings bank account or MACAD scheme account of petitioners i.e. the bank account of petitioners shall be individual account and not a joint account.
25. The original fixed deposits be retained by the UCO Bank, MACP No. 150/18 Page no.12 of 18 PHC, New Delhi in safe custody. However, the statement containing FDR numbers, amounts, dates of maturity and maturity amounts shall be furnished by the said bank to the petitioners and the above amount shall be released in account of petitioners by the Manager, UCO Bank, PHC, ND through RTGS/NEFT/or any other electronic mode.
26. The monthly interest be credited by Electronic Clearing System (ECS) in the savings bank account of the claimant(s) near the place of their residence.
27. The maturity amount of the FDR (s) on monthly basis net of TDS be credited by Electronic Clearing System (ECS) in the above accounts of petitioners.
28. No loan, advance or withdrawal or pre-mature discharge be allowed on the MACAD without permission of the Court.
29. The concerned bank shall not issue any cheque book and/or debit card to claimant(s). However, in case the debit card and/or cheque book have already been issued, bank shall cancel the same before the disbursement of the award amount. The bank shall debit card(s) freeze the account of the claimant(s) so that no debit card be issued in respect of the account of the claimant(s) from any other branch of the bank.
30. The bank shall make an endorsement on the passbook of the claimant(s) to the effect that no cheque book and/or debit card have been issued and shall not be issued without the permission of the Court and claimant(s) shall produce the passbook with the necessary endorsement before the Court on the next date fixed for compliance.
31. It is clarified that the endorsement made by the bank along with the duly signed and stamped by the bank official on the passbook(s) of the claimant(s) is sufficient compliance of clause above.
LIABILITY
MACP No. 150/18 Page no.13 of 18
32. All the respondents are though being held jointly and severally liable to pay the awarded amount of compensation to petitioners, respondent no. 3 being insurer of offending vehicle is directed to deposit the award amount with UCO Bank, Patiala House Court Branch, along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of claim petition by RTGS/NEFT/IMPS in bank account being maintained in the above said bank in name of this tribunal within 30 days from today. In case even after passage of 90 days from today, respondent no. 3 fails to deposit this compensation with interest, respondent no. 3 shall be liable to pay interest at the rate of 9% per annum for the period of delay beyond 90 days from today and in light of judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi passed in the case of New India Assurance Company Limited Vs. Kashmiri Lal2007 ACJ 688, this compensation shall be recovered by attaching the bank account of Respondent no. 3 with a cost of Rs.5,000/-.
33. The respondent no. 3 shall inform the claimants and their counsels through registered post that the awarded amount has been being deposited so as to facilitate them to collect the same.
34. A copy of this award be given to the parties free of cost or be sent by email. Ahlmad is directed to send a copy of the award to Ld. Metropolitan Magistrate concerned and Delhi Legal Services Authority in view of Judgment titled as Rajesh Tyagi Vs. Jaibir Singh & Ors. passed in FAO no.842/2003 dated 12.12.2014.
35. Further, Nazir is directed to maintain the record in Form XVIII as per the directions given by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the above case on 08.01.2021.
36. The particulars of Form-XVII of the Modified Claims Tribunal Agreed Procedure, in terms of directions given by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the above case on 08.01.2021, are as under:
MACP No. 150/18 Page no.14 of 18
1. Date of the accident 08.05.2017
2. Date of filing of Form I- First Accident NA
Report (FAR)
3. Date of delivery of Form-II to the NA
victim(s)
4. Date of receipt of Form-III from the NA
Driver
5. Date of receipt of Form-IV from the NA
owner
6. Date of filing of the Form-V-Interim NA
Accident Report (IAR)
7. Date of receipt of Form-VIA and Form NA
VIB from the Victim (s)
8. Date of filing of Form-VII-Detailed NA as it is an outstation matter
Accident Report (DAR)
9. Whether there was any delay or
deficiency on the part of the No
Investigating Officer? If so, whether any action/direction warranted?
10. Date of appointment of the Designated Not given Officer by the Insurance Company.
11. Whether the Designated Officer of the Insurance Company submitted his No report within 30 days of the DAR?
12. Whether there was any delay or deficiencies on the part of the Designated Officer of the Insurance No Company? If so, whether any action/direction warranted?
13. Date of response of the claimant(s) of Legal offer not filed the offer of the Insurance Company.
14. Date of the award 31.05.2022
15. Whether the claimant(s) were directed to open savings bank account(s) near Yes their place of residence?
16. Date of order by which claimant(s) were 08.10.2018 directed to open savings bank MACP No. 150/18 Page no.15 of 18 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(s).
17. Date on which the claimant(s) produced the passbook of their savings bank account near the place of their Yet to furnish residence along with the endorsement, PAN Card and Adhaar Card?
18. Permanent Residential Address of the R/o H.No. 231, Dehra, Dhaulana, Claimant(s) Hapur, U.P. 245301.
19. Whether the claimant(s) savings bank account(s) is near his place of Yet to furnish residence?
20. Whether the claimant(s) were examined at the time of passing of the Yes award to ascertain his/their financial condition?
37. File be consigned to record room after compliance of necessary formalities. Separate file be prepared for compliance report and be put up on 16.09.2022.
Announced in the open court. (Manjusha Wadhwa) on 31.05.2022 PO/MACT, New Delhi
Encl: SUMMARY OF COMPUTATION OF AWARD AMOUNT IN FORM XV MACP No. 150/18 Page no.16 of 18 SUMMARY OF COMPUTATION OF AWARD AMOUNT IN FORM XV
1. Date of accident : 08.05.2018
2. Name of the deceased : Wahid
3. Age of the deceased : 16 years and six months
4. Occupation of the deceased : Student
5. Income of the deceased : Notional income
6. Name, age and relationship of legal representative of deceased:-
Srl. No. Name Age Relation
(i) Faimida 54 years Mother
(ii) Mursalim 16 years Brother
Computation of Compensation
Sr. Heads Amount Awarded
No.
7 Income of the deceased (A) Rs.40,800/-
8 Add-Future Prospects (B) Nil as the compensation has
been computed as per the law
laid down in the case of
Chetan Malhotra (supra)
9 Less-Personal expenses of 1/3rd of Rs. 40,800/-
the deceased (C)
10 Monthly loss of NA
dependency
[(A+B) - C = D]
11 Annual loss of dependency NA
(D x 12)
12 Multiplier (E) 18
13 Total loss of dependency NA
(D x 12 x E = F)
14 Medical Expenses (G) NA
15 Compensation for loss of NA
love and affection (H)
16 Compensation for loss of NA
consortium (I)
17 Compensation for loss of Rs.9,79,200/-
estate (J)
18 Compensation towards NA
funeral expenses (K)
19 TOTAL COMPENSATION Rs.9,79,200/-
(F + G + H + I + J+K =L)
MACP No. 150/18 Page no.17 of 18
20 RATE OF INTEREST 6% pa from date of filing of
AWARDED claim petition till deposit in 30
days and 9% after 90 days.
21 Interest amount up to the date Rs.2,22,130.85
of award (M)
22 Total amount including interest Rs. 12,01,330.85 (rounded
(L+M) off to Rs. 12,01,500/-)
23 Award amount released P-1 = 25% of her share
P-2 = 50% of his share
24 Award amount kept in FDRs/ P-1 = 75% of her share
MACAD P-2 = 50% of his share
25 Mode of disbursement of the Through bank
award amount to claimant(s)
26 Next date for compliance of 16.09.2022
the award
(Manjusha Wadhwa)
PO/MACT, New Delhi
31.05.2022
MACP No. 150/18 Page no.18 of 18