Delhi District Court
Ramadass vs Sovram Singh on 28 March, 2026
IN THE COURT OF DR. SHIRISH AGGARWAL
PRESIDING OFFICER:MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS
TRIBUNAL-01, PATIALA HOUSE COURTS, NEW DELHI
DLND010064022022
DAR No. 700/22
Sh. Ramdass
S/o Sh. Kanhiya Lal,
R/o ESI Hospital, Punjabi Bagh, Delhi.
......Claimant/Injured
Versus
1. Sh. Sov Ram Singh (Driver)
S/o Sh. Shiv Lal Singh,
R/o VPO Kundariya, PS Bakewar,
District Etawah, U.P.
2. Sh. S. Bala Subramaniyan (Owner)
M/s Multimodal Clearing and TPT SER,
A61A, Vishwakarma Colony, Mehrauli,
Badarpur, New Delhi.
3. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. (Insurer)
Oriental House, A-25/27, Asaf Ali Road,
New Delhi. .........Respondents
Date of filing of DAR : 27.07.2022 Date of framing of issues : 01.06.2023 Date of concluding arguments : 27.03.2026 Date of decision : 28.03.2026 DAR No. 700/22 Ram Dass Vs. Sov Ram & Ors. 28.03.2026 Page 1/21 AWARD/JUDGMENT
1. The claim for compensation raised in the present Detailed Accident Report (DAR) is in respect of simple injuries alleged to have been sustained by the claimant in a motor accident that took place on 31.05.2018 at about 03:50 AM, at Outer Ring Road Near IIT, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi, regarding which FIR No.177/18 was registered at PS Vasant Vihar.
2. The offending vehicle involved in this case is a truck bearing registration No. HR-55N-6362, which at the relevant time of accident was being driven by respondent no. 1 Sov Ram, owned by respondent no. 2 S. Bala Subramaniyan and insured with respondent no. 3 Oriental Insurance Company Ltd.
Case of the claimant
3. It is the case of the claimant that he along with other workers were doing the work of removing dust from the divider of Ring Road at IIT Gate towards Munrika. In the meantime, a truck bearing registration No. HR-55N-6362, which was being driven by respondent no. 1 at high speed and in a rash and negligent manner, came and hit the claimant due to which he sustained grievous injuries. It is further stated that the claimant was taken to JPNA Trauma Centre, where his MLC was prepared by the doctors.
Case of respondent no. 1 and 2
4. Respondents no. 1 and 2 filed their joint written statement to the DAR wherein it is stated that the alleged accident did not occur from the alleged offending vehicle and the vehicle was DAR No. 700/22 Ram Dass Vs. Sov Ram & Ors. 28.03.2026 Page 2/21 falsely implicated in the present case. It is further stated that the respondent no. 1 was holding a valid and effective driving license and the alleged offending vehicle was duly insured with respondent no. 3 at the time of accident.
Case of respondent no. 3
5. Respondent no. 3 filed its reply to the DAR wherein it is stated that the alleged offending vehicle was duly insured with it in the name of M/s Multimodal Clearing and TPT Services. It is further stated that the fitness of the alleged offending vehicle was not valid on the date of accident.
6. It is pertinent to mention that vide order dated 01.06.2023, four connected DARs bearing Nos. D-698/22, 699/22, 700/22 & 701/22 arising out of the same accident were consolidated for the purpose of trial and DAR No. 701/22 was directed to be treated as the lead case for recording of evidence.
Issues
7. On 01.06.2023, the following consolidated issues were framed by this Tribunal :-
1. Whether Sh. Nand Kishor (injured in DAR No. 698/22), Sh. Ram Prasad Raikwar (injured in DAR No. 699/22), Sh. Ram Dass (injured in DAR No. 700/22) sustained injuries and Sh. Bechan Sada (deceased in DAR No. 701/22) sustained fatal injuries in the accident which occurred on 31.05.2018 at about 03:50 am, at Outer Ring Road Near IIT, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi caused by rash and negligent driving of vehicle No. HR-55N-6362 being driven by respondent no. 1, DAR No. 700/22 Ram Dass Vs. Sov Ram & Ors. 28.03.2026 Page 3/21 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? OPP.
3. Relief.
Claimant's evidence
8. In support of his claim, the claimant examined Sh. Dashrath, father of deceased Bechan Sada in the connected matter as PW1. He tendered his evidence by way of affidavit as Ex. PW1/A and relied upon the following documents :-
(i). Ex. PW1/1 (OSR) is the copy of his Aadhaar card.
(ii). Ex.PW1/2 (OSR) is the copy of Aadhaar card of brother of deceased.
(iii). Ex. PW1/3 (OSR) is the copy of Aadhaar card of deceased.
(iv). Ex. PW1/4 (colly) is the DAR filed by the IO.
9. The claimant examined Sh. Ram Prasad, injured in the connected matter as PW1. He tendered his evidence by way of affidavit Ex. PW1/A and relied upon the following documents :-
(i). Ex. PW1/1 (OSR) is the copy of his Aadhaar card.
(ii). Ex. PW1/2 (colly) is the DAR filed by the IO.
10. Both the witnesses were cross-examined and discharged.
Respondents'evidence
11. Respondent no.3/Insurance Company examined Sh.
DAR No. 700/22 Ram Dass Vs. Sov Ram & Ors. 28.03.2026 Page 4/21Akarsh Deepak, Assistant Manager from their Company as R3W1. He tendered his evidence by way of affidavit Ex. R3W1/A and relied upon the following documents :-
(i). Ex.R3W1/A is the certified copy of policy.
(ii). Ex. R3W1/B is the copy of notice.
(iii). Ex. R3W1/C is the copy of postal receipts.
(iv). Ex. R3W1/D are the original postal receipts.
12. R3W1 was cross-examined and discharged.
Findings
13. I have heard arguments and have carefully perused the entire case record.
14. The findings on the aforementioned issues are rendered hereinafter in the succeeding paragraphs. ISSUE NO. 1 - Whether Sh. Nand Kishor (injured in DAR No. 698/22), Sh. Ram Prasad Raikwar (injured in DAR No. 699/22), Sh. Ram Dass (injured in DAR No. 700/22) sustained injuries and Sh. Bechan Sada (deceased in DAR No. 701/22) sustained fatal injuries in the accident which occurred on 31.05.2018 at about 03:50 am, at Outer Ring Road Near IIT, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi caused by rash and negligent driving of vehicle No. HR-55N-6362 being driven by respondent no. 1, owned by respondent no. 2 and insured with respondent no. 3 ? OPP.
15. Onus to prove this issue was upon the claimant. The Sh. Dasrath, father of deceased Bechan in the connected matter has examined himself as PW1. Since PW1 during cross-examination DAR No. 700/22 Ram Dass Vs. Sov Ram & Ors. 28.03.2026 Page 5/21 himself admitted that he is not an eye witness to the accident, his testimony cannot be considered for determining if the vehicle was being driven rashly and negligently.
16. The claimant also Sh. Ram Prasad, injured in the connected matter as PW1. He deposed that he along with other workers were doing the work of removing dust from the divider of Ring Road at IIT Gate towards Munrika. He further deposed that in the meantime, a truck bearing registration No. HR-55N-6362, which was being driven by respondent no. 1 at high speed and in a rash and negligent manner, came and hit him and other persons due to which he and other persons sustained grievous injuries and one person namely Bechan Sada succumbed to his injuries sustained in the accident.
17. During cross-examination, he admitted that he was an eye witness to the accident. He deposed that he was removing dust on the road at the time of accident and reflector was put on the working site. He further deposed that the offending vehicle after jumping the reflector hit them. He further deposed that all the workers including himself sustained injuries and Bechan Sada died on the spot. He further deposed that the offending vehicle was truck, but he did not remember the registration number of the offending vehicle.
18. The testimony of Sh. Ram Prasad is coherent and consistent. Nothing material could be elicited from his cross- examination to disbelieve or discard his testimony. His testimony DAR No. 700/22 Ram Dass Vs. Sov Ram & Ors. 28.03.2026 Page 6/21 has been duly corroborated with the DAR filed by the IO.
19. Reliance is being placed upon the judgment of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in case Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Meera Devi & ors., 2021 LawSuit (Del) 2021 wherein it was held that "......in view of Delhi Motor Accident Claim Tribunal Rules, 2008, contents of DAR has to be presumed to be correct and read in evidence without formal proof of the same unless proof to the contrary was produced."
20. Chargesheet was also filed against the driver of the 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 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.
21. 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 DAR No. 700/22 Ram Dass Vs. Sov Ram & Ors. 28.03.2026 Page 7/21 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.
22. 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.
23. In view of foregoing discussion, it stands proved on touchstone of preponderance of probability that Sh. Ram Dass sustained simple injuries in the accident which took place due to rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle bearing registration no. HR-55N-6362 and the said vehicle at that time was being driven by respondent no. 1, owned by respondent no. 2 and insured by respondent no.3. Hence, this issue is decided in favour of the claimants and against the respondents. ISSUE NO. 2 - Whether the claimants are entitled for compensation? If so, to what amount and from whom? OPP.
24. As the issue No.1 has been decided in favour of the claimant, he has become entitled to be compensated for the injuries suffered by him in the accident, but the computation of compensation and liability to pay the same are required to be DAR No. 700/22 Ram Dass Vs. Sov Ram & Ors. 28.03.2026 Page 8/21 decided.
25. In terms of Section 168 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988, the compensation which is to be awarded by this Tribunal is required to be 'just'. In injury cases, a claimant is entitled to two different kinds of compensation i.e. pecuniary as well as non- pecuniary damages. The Hon'ble Apex Court in Raj Kumar Vs. Ajay Kumar reported in (2011) 1 SCC 343, has laid down heads under which compensation is awarded in personal injury cases as:-
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).DAR No. 700/22 Ram Dass Vs. Sov Ram & Ors. 28.03.2026 Page 9/21
26. Having considered the ratio of aforesaid judgment, the compensation payable to claimant is assessed hereinafter under the following heads as:-
(i) Medical or Treatment Expenses
27. As per MLC of claimant issued by JPNA Trauma Centre, the doctor had opined the nature of injuries of claimant to be simple.
28. As per discharge summary filed along with the DAR, the claimant was admitted in JPNA Trauma Centre on 31.05.2018 and discharged on the same day where he was diagnosed with soft tissue injury.
29. Claimant has not tendered on record his medical bills pertaining to the injuries sustained in the accident. Since no medical bills were placed on record by the claimant, he is held not entitled to any amount under this head.
(ii) Loss of earnings
30. Claimant in his statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. has stated that he was working as labour on contractual basis with PWD. This claim has not been denied by the respondents in their reply and will therefore have to be accepted to be correct.
31. During the course of final arguments, Ld. Counsel for DAR No. 700/22 Ram Dass Vs. Sov Ram & Ors. 28.03.2026 Page 10/21 Insurance Company has argued that the minimum wages of unskilled workers in Bihar are applicable in the present matter since there is no document to show that the claimant was working in Delhi.
32. It is stated in the DAR that the accident had taken place when the complainant along with his colleagues were cleaning Outer Ring Road, Near IIT, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi. It is stated that the Mahindra Van which is used for traveling by the workers was parked on the side. It is further stated that the truck No. HR-55N-6362 came and hit Mahindra van as well as Bechan Sada and Ram Prasad. Even as per the FIR, the victim was working in Delhi.
33. In the case of Meera Devi (supra), it was held that the contents of DAR are presumed to be correct.
34. As such the contents of DAR that the victim was working in Delhi is presumed to be correct, particularly when no material to the contrary has been brought on record.
35. In the case of Babu Vs. Vikas Duggal, MAC Appeal No. 1163/2018, decided by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi on 16.07.2019, even though no documents were filed to establish that the victim was working in Delhi, the Court granted minimum wages of Delhi while observing that in the unorganized sector, ordinarily, no record and proof of employment and earnings is available. The victim in the present case was working in the unorganized sector by doing labour work.
DAR No. 700/22 Ram Dass Vs. Sov Ram & Ors. 28.03.2026 Page 11/2136. Since the income of claimant has not been established on record, the minimum wages of unskilled person is taken into account as per rates prevalent in Delhi, which was Rs. 13,896/- per month at the time of accident.
37. Keeping in view the nature of injuries and duration of his treatment, this Tribunal feels it just and reasonable to compensate him for loss of earning equivalent to a period of one month. Therefore, under this head, he is being awarded an amount of Rs.13,896/-.
(iii) Mental and Physical Shock, Pain and Sufferings & Loss of Amenities
38. As stated above, the claimant had suffered simple injuries in the accident. Though, it is not possible to exactly compensate him for the shock, pain and sufferings etc. which he had actually suffered because of the above injuries, but an effort has to be made to compensate him for the same in a just and reasonable manner. Hence, keeping in view the extent and nature of the injuries suffered by the claimant and duration of the treatment taken by him etc., an amount of Rs.10,000/- each is being awarded to him towards (i) mental and physical shock and (ii) for pain and sufferings respectively. However, no amount is being awarded to the claimant towards loss of amenities. Thus, he is awarded total amount of Rs.20,000/- under this head.
(iv) Conveyance, Special Diet and Attendant Charges
39. The claimant has not placed on record any document to show the amount spent towards conveyance, special diet and DAR No. 700/22 Ram Dass Vs. Sov Ram & Ors. 28.03.2026 Page 12/21 attendant charges. Still this Tribunal can very well take note of the requirement of conveyance for claimant for visiting the hospitals and doctors in connection with his treatment and special diet for his early recovery from the injuries suffered because of the accident. Considering the facts and circumstances of the present case, an amount of Rs.5,000/- each is being awarded to the claimant towards conveyance and special diet.
40. Since the claimant suffered simple injuries in the accident, no amount is being awarded to the claimant towards attendant charges. The claimant is thus entitled to an amount of Rs.10,000/- (Rs.5,000/- + Rs.5,000/-) under this head.
ISSUE No. 3/Relief
41. In view of foregoing discussion, the claimant is thus awarded a sum of Rs.43,896/- (Rupees Fourty Three Thousand Eight Hundred Ninety Six only) (Rs.13,896/- + Rs.20,000/- + Rs.10,000/-) along with 7.5% interest 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.
RELEASE
42. The entire awarded amount is directed to be released in the saving bank account of claimant through RTGS/NEFT or any other electronic mode.
LIABILITY
43. The Insurance Company in their reply has stated that DAR No. 700/22 Ram Dass Vs. Sov Ram & Ors. 28.03.2026 Page 13/21 the fitness of alleged offending vehicle was valid upto 01.09.2017 whereas the accident took place on 31.05.2018 and hence, the fitness was not valid on the date of accident.
44. During the course of final arguments, Ld. Counsel for Insurance company has argued that recovery rights be granted to the Insurance Company as the fitness of offending vehicle was not valid on the date of accident.
45. In order to prove that there was no fitness certificate of the truck on the date of accident, the Insurance Company examined Sh. Akarsh Deepak, Assistant Manager from their Company as R3W1. He deposed that the owner of the offending vehicle was using the vehicle without valid fitness certificate on the date of accident. He further deposed that the Insurance Company had sent notice dated 29.04.2024 to the driver and owner of the offending vehicle to produce the original fitness certificate. He further deposed that despite notice being sent, they have not provided the copy of fitness certificate to the Insurance Company.
46. During the course of final arguments, Ld. Counsel for respondents no. 1 and 2 admitted that on the date of accident, there was no fitness certificate of the truck.
47. In the case of Kaushalpati Pandey Vs. New India Assurance Co. Ltd. & Ors., MAC Appeal No. 185/2020, decided by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi on 09.11.2020, it was held that the conditions imposed in the policy are rooted in constant prudent measures to be observed to minimize losses. It was held that fitness DAR No. 700/22 Ram Dass Vs. Sov Ram & Ors. 28.03.2026 Page 14/21 certificate for a motor vehicle is one such prudent measure. It was observed that for a policy holder to say that the policy will cover the insurer de hors the specific conditions imposed therein, would be to negate the fundamentals of the contract. The decision of the Full Bench of Hon'ble High Court of Kerela in Ramankutty Vs. Pareed Pillai, 2018 SCC Online Ker 3542 was relied upon by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi. In the said case, the Hon'ble High Court of Kerala had held that non possession of a fitness certificate was a foundational breach of the contract as well as breach of statutory provisions. It was held that the policy would not extent to a compensation claim where the fitness certificate of insured vehicle was not available.
48. In view of the above and the submission of Ld. Counsel for respondent no. 3 that the recovery rights be granted to the Insurance Company, the Insurance Company is held entitled to recovery rights against the respondent no. 2/owner.
49. Respondent no.3 being insurer of offending vehicle, is first directed to deposit the award amount with UCO Bank, Patiala House Court Branch, along with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of DAR by RTGS/NEFT/IMPS in bank account being maintained in the above said bank in name of this tribunal within 30 days from today, failing which it is liable to pay interest at the rate of 9% per annum for the period of delay. In case even after lapse of 90 days from today, respondent no. 3 fails to deposit this compensation with interest, in that event, in light of judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi passed in the case of New India DAR No. 700/22 Ram Dass Vs. Sov Ram & Ors. 28.03.2026 Page 15/21 Assurance Company Limited Vs. Kashmiri Lal 2007 ACJ 688 , this compensation shall be recovered by attaching the bank account of respondent no. 3 with a cost of Rs.5,000/-.
50. The respondent no.3 shall inform the claimant and his counsel through registered post that the awarded amount has been deposited so as to facilitate him to collect the same.
51. A copy of this award be given to the parties free of cost or be sent to them by email. Ahlmad is directed to send a copy of the award to the concerned Magistrate 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.
52. 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.
53. 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:
1. Date of the accident 31.05.2018
2. Date of filing of Form I- First NA Accident 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 NA DAR No. 700/22 Ram Dass Vs. Sov Ram & Ors. 28.03.2026 Page 16/21 the owner
6. Date of filing of the Form-V- NA Interim Accident Report (IAR)
7. Date of receipt of Form-VIA and NA Form VIB from the Victim (s)
8. Date of filing of Form-VII-Detailed 27.07.2022 Accident Report (DAR)
9. Whether there was any delay or No deficiency on the part of the Investigating Officer? If so, whether any action/direction warranted?
10. Date of appointment of the Not given Designated Officer by the Insurance Company.
11. Whether the Designated Officer of No the Insurance Company submitted his report within 30 days of the DAR?
12. Whether there was any delay or Yes deficiencies on the part of the Designated Officer of the Insurance Company? If so, whether any action/direction warranted?
13. Date of response of the claimant(s) Legal offer not filed.
of the offer of the Insurance Company.
14. Date of the Award 28.03.2026
15. Whether the claimant(s) were Yes directed to open savings bank account(s) near their place of residence?
16. Date of order by which claimant(s) 27.07.2022 DAR No. 700/22 Ram Dass Vs. Sov Ram & Ors. 28.03.2026 Page 17/21 were directed to open savings bank account(s) near his place of residence and produce PAN Card and Adhaar Card and the direction to the bank not issue any cheque book/debit card to the claimant (s) and make an endorsement to this effect on the passbook(s).
17. Date on which the claimant(s) Dispensed with as the produced the passbook of their entire amount savings bank account near the place released. of their residence along with the endorsement, PAN Card and Adhaar Card?
18. Permanent Residential Address of As mentioned above the claimant(s)
19. Whether the claimant(s) savings Cannot say bank account(s) is near his place of residence?
20. Whether the claimant(s) were No examined at the time of passing of the award to ascertain his/their financial condition?
54. File be consigned to record room after completion of necessary formalities. Separate file be prepared for compliance report and be put up on 15.07.2026. Digitally signed by SHIRISH SHIRISH AGGARWAL AGGARWAL Date:
2026.03.28 16:47:24 +0530 Announced in the open court (Shirish Aggarwal) on 28.03.2026 PO/MACT-01, New Delhi Encl: The summary of computation in the prescribed format DAR No. 700/22 Ram Dass Vs. Sov Ram & Ors. 28.03.2026 Page 18/21 SUMMARY OF THE COMPUTATION OF AWARD IN INJURY CASES IN FORM XVI
1. Date of accident : 31.05.2018
2. Name of the injured : Sh. Ram Dass
3. Age of the injured : 38 years
4. Occupation of the injured : Minimum wages of unskilled worker in Delhi
5. Income of the injured : Rs.13,896/- per month
6. Nature of injury : Simple
7. Medical treatment taken by : JPNA Trauma Centre, the injured New Delhi.
8. Period of hospitalization : Discharged on the same day.
9. Whether any permanent : Nil disability?
10. Computation of Compensation Sr.No. Heads
11. Pecuniary Loss
(i) Expenditure on treatment : Nil
(ii) Expenditure on conveyance : Rs.5,000/-
(iii) Expenditure on special diet : Rs.5,000/-
(iv) Cost of nursing/attendant : Nil
(v) Loss of earning capacity : Nil
(vi) Loss of Income : Rs.13,896/-
(vii) Any other loss which may : Nil
require any special
treatment or aid to the
injured for the rest of his life
12. Non-pecuniary Loss:
(i) Compensation for mental : Rs.10,000/-
DAR No. 700/22
Ram Dass Vs. Sov Ram & Ors. 28.03.2026 Page 19/21
and physical shock
(ii) Pain and suffering : Rs.10,000/-
(iii) Loss of amenities of life : Nil
(iv) Disfiguration : Nil
(v) Loss of marriage prospects : Nil
(vi) Loss of earning, : Nil
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 : Nil
assessed and nature of
disability as permanent or
temporary
(ii) Loss of amenities or loss of : Nil
expectation of life span on
account of disability.
(iii) Percentage of loss of : Nil
earning relation to disability
(iv) Loss of future income : Nil
14. Total Compensation Rs.43,896/-
15. Interest Awarded : 7.5% pa from date of
filing of DAR till the
date of award to be
deposited in 30 days
and 9% thereafter.
16. Interest amount up to the : Rs.12,081/-
date of award
17. Total amount including : Rs.55,977/- (rounded off
interest to Rs.56,000/-)
DAR No. 700/22
Ram Dass Vs. Sov Ram & Ors. 28.03.2026 Page 20/21
18. Award amount released : Entire amount
19. Award amount kept in the : Nil
FDRs/ Motor Accident
Claims Annuity Deposit
(MACAD)
20. Mode of disbursement of : Through Bank
the award amount to the
claimant (s)
21. Next date for compliance : 15.07.2026
of the award
Digitally signed
by SHIRISH
AGGARWAL
SHIRISH
Date:
AGGARWAL 2026.03.28
16:47:32
+0530
(Shirish Aggarwal)
PO/MACT-01, New Delhi
28.03.2026
DAR No. 700/22
Ram Dass Vs. Sov Ram & Ors. 28.03.2026 Page 21/21