Delhi District Court
Rita Devi And Ors. (Petition) (F) vs Mukesh Kumar Singh And Ors on 8 December, 2023
DLCT010120272018
Presented on : 15.09.2018
Registered on : 17.09.2018
Decided on : 08.12.2023
Duration : 05 Years
02 Months
IN THE TRIBUNAL OF PRESIDING OFFICER-MACT-02,
CENTRAL, TIS HAZARI COURTS, DELHI PRESIDED
OVER BY DR.PANKAJ SHARMA
IN THE MATTER OF CASE/ MACT No. 746/18
(For Grant of Compensation in respect of the fatal injuries of
deceased Pawan Shah)(LEAD CASE) :
1. RITA DEVI
W/o Late Sh. Pawan Shah
2. KRISHNA KUMARI
D/o Late Sh. Pawan Shah
3. KIRAN KUMARI
D/o Late Sh. Pawan Shah
4. NITISH KUMAR
S/o Late Sh. Pawan Shah
5. ABHISHEK KUMAR
S/o Late Sh. Pawan Shah
6. BULAKAN SAH (since expired)
S/o Late Sh. Fakira Sah
7. BANARSI DEVI (since expired)
W/o Sh. Bulakan Sah
MACT No. 746/18 Rita Devi & Ors. Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors. Page No. 1/50
MACT No. 744/18 Ram Lakhan Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors.
Digitally
signed by
PANKAJ
PANKAJ SHARMA
SHARMA Date:
2023.12.08
12:53:45
+0530
All R/o Village - Hasana, Hasana Gaddi,
Gayghat, Muzaffarpur,
Bihar.
2nd Address:
Plot No. 73-74, Gali No. 3,
Khasra No. 58/9, Vijay Colony,
Burari, Delhi. .......Petitioners
VERSUS
1. SH. MUKESH KUMAR SINGH
S/o Sh. Nand Kishor,
R/o Village - Pure Binda,
PO - Rasehata, Raebareli,
U.P. (Driver)
2. M/s. Mehrab Logistics and Aviation Ltd.
C/o Abdul Hai Khan,
At : TC-16V, Vibhuti Khand,
Gomti Nagar, Lucknow,
U.P. (Registered Owner).
3. THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.
Office at : A-25/27, Asaf Ali Road,
New Delhi (Insurer).
.....Respondents
AND DLCT010120352018 MACT No. 746/18 Rita Devi & Ors. Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors. Page No. 2/50 MACT No. 744/18 Ram Lakhan Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors.
Digitally
signed by
PANKAJ
PANKAJ SHARMA
SHARMA Date:
2023.12.08
12:53:50
+0530
Presented on : 15.09.2018
Registered on : 17.09.2018
Decided on : 08.12.2023
Duration : 05 Years
02 Months
IN THE TRIBUNAL OF PRESIDING OFFICER-MACT-02, (CENTRAL), TIS HAZARI COURTS, DELHI PRESIDED OVER BY DR. PANKAJ SHARMA.
MACT NO. 744/2018SH. RAM LAKHAN S/o Sh. Jageshwar, R/o 140-A, Burari, North Delhi, Delhi-110084. .......Petitioner VERSUS
1. SH. MUKESH KUMAR SINGH S/o Sh. Nand Kishor, R/o Village - Pure Binda, PO - Rasehata, Raebareli, U.P. (Driver)
2. M/s. Mehrab Logistics and Aviation Ltd.
C/o Abdul Hai Khan, At : TC-16V, Vibhuti Khand, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow, U.P. (Registered Owner).
3. THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.
Office at : A-25/27, Asaf Ali Road, New Delhi (Insurer).
.....Respondents The particulars as per Form-XVII, Central Motor MACT No. 746/18 Rita Devi & Ors. Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors. Page No. 3/50 MACT No. 744/18 Ram Lakhan Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors.
Digitally signed by PANKAJ SHARMA PANKAJ Date:
SHARMA 2023.12.08
12:53:55
+0530
Vehicles (fifth Amendment) Rules, 2022 (Pl. see Rule 150A) are as under:-
1. Date of the accident 28.07.2018
2. Date of filing of Form-I - First Accident N.A. Report (FAR)
3. Date of delivery of Form-II to the N.A. victim(s)
4. Date of receipt of Form-III from the N.A. Driver
5. Date of receipt of Form-IV from the N.A. Owner
6. Date of filing of the Form-V-Interim N.A. Accident Report (IAR)
7. Date of receipt of Form-VIA and Form- N.A. VIB from the Victim(s)
8. Date of filing of Form-VII - Detailed N.A. Accident Report (DAR)
9. Whether there was any delay or N.A. deficiency on the part of the Investigating Officer? If so, whether any action/ direction warranted?
10. Date of appointment of the Designated N.A. Officer by the Insurance Company
11. Whether the Designated Officer of the No Insurance Company submitted his report within 30 days of the DAR?
12. Whether there was any delay or No deficiency on the part of the Designated officer of the Insurance Company? If so, whether any action/ direction warranted?
13. Date of response of the petitioner(s) to N.A. the offer of the Insurance Company.MACT No. 746/18 Rita Devi & Ors. Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors. Page No. 4/50
MACT No. 744/18 Ram Lakhan Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors.
Digitally signed by PANKAJ SHARMA PANKAJ Date:
SHARMA 2023.12.08
12:53:59
+0530
14. Date of the award 08.12.2023
15. Whether the petitioner (s) was/were Yes
directed to open savings bank account(s) near his/their place of residence?
16. Date of order by which claimant(s) 11.10.2022 was/were directed to open savings bank account(s) near his/their place of residence and produce PAN Card and Adhaar Card and the direction to the bank not issue any cheque book/debit card to the claimant(s) and make an endorsement to this effect on the passbook.
17. Date on which the claimant(s) produced 19.12.2022 the passbook of his/their savings bank account near the place of his/their residence along with the endorsement, PAN Card and Aadhaar Card?
18. Permanent Residential Address of the Address of Ram Claimant(s). Lakhan :140A, Burari, Delhi.
Address of Rita Devi and other petitioners : Plot No. 73-74, Gali No.3, Kh. No. 58/9, Ground Floor, Vijay Colony, Burari, Delhi and also at Hasna Gaddi, Hasna, Muzaffarpur, Bihar.
19. Whether the claimant(s) savings bank Yes account(s) is near his/their place of MACT No. 746/18 Rita Devi & Ors. Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors. Page No. 5/50 MACT No. 744/18 Ram Lakhan Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors.
Digitally signed by PANKAJ SHARMA PANKAJ Date:
SHARMA 2023.12.08
12:54:04
+0530
residence?
20. Whether the claimant(s) were examined Yes
at the time of passing of the award to ascertain his/their financial condition?
COMMON AWARD/JUDGMENT FACTUAL POSITION
1. These two petitions bearing MACT No. 746/18 & 744/2018, U/s 166 read with Section 140 of M.V. Act was filed on 17.09.2018 seeking compensation to the tune of Rs.40,00,000/- (Rupees Forty Lacs Only) in respect of the death of one Sh. Pawan Shah S/o Sh. Bulakan Sah (hereinafter referred to as "deceased") and the other petition seeking compensation to the tune of Rs.10,00,000/-(Rs.Ten Lacs Only) in respect of injuries sustained by one Sh. Ram Lakhan S/o Sh.Jageshwar (hereinafter referred to as "injured") respectively due to a motor vehicular accident dated 27.07.2018 at about 04:00 A.M. at a spot in front of Thana Gate, Beat No. Hans Khera, P/s-Para, Lucknow. As per petition, at the relevant date and time mentioned above, Ram Lakhan alongwith Pawan Shah were going to Delhi from Muzaffarpur, Bihar by Bus bearing no. UP-72AT-2984 which was being driven by its driver at correct side of road and when he was reached at in front of Thana Gate, Beat No. Hans Khera, PS-Para, Lucknow, then a vehicle i.e. truck (Container) bearing no. UP-32-JN-9953(hereinafter referred to as MACT No. 746/18 Rita Devi & Ors. Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors. Page No. 6/50 MACT No. 744/18 Ram Lakhan Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors.
Digitally
signed by
PANKAJ
PANKAJ SHARMA
SHARMA Date:
2023.12.08
12:54:08
+0530
'offending vehicle') which was being driven by its driver(R-1 herein) at a very high speed, rashly, negligently, in a zig-zag manner, without observing proper look out and violating the traffic rules, forcefully hit with the aforesaid bus, resultantly Pawan Shah got expired and Ram Lakhan got injured alongwith many people having sustained injuries all over their bodies. Pawan Shah died on the spot. Ram Lakhan was removed to Lok Bandhu Hospital at Lucknow from the place of accident and got admitted there. Injured Ram Lakhan suffered permanent disability due to the injuries received in the accident. An FIR No. 364/2018, PS Para, U.P., U/s 279/337/338/304A IPC was registered by police regarding the occurrence of the above accident. R-1 is the driver of the offending vehicle. R-2 is the registered owner of the vehicle. R-3 is the insurer of the offending vehicle. This Tribunal directed R-3/insurance company to file a legal offer/reasoned decision in response to the said DAR. R-1 & R-2 were also directed to file their Written Statements.
PLEADINGS
2. R-1 & R-2 have filed their common written statements in both the cases. It is stated in written statements filed by R-1 & R-2 that the accident has not taken place as the alleged offending vehicle was not driven by the R-1 on the date of accident. It is stated that R-1 was having valid driving license at the time of alleged accident. It is stated that present petitions are MACT No. 746/18 Rita Devi & Ors. Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors. Page No. 7/50 MACT No. 744/18 Ram Lakhan Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors.
Digitally signed by PANKAJ SHARMAPANKAJ Date:
SHARMA 2023.12.08 12:54:13 +0530 misconceived, fabricated, false and frivolous and police falsely implicated the alleged vehicle in this case without any proof. It is stated that the vehicle in question was fully insured at the time of accident. They further declined the contents of petition in toto.
3. R-3/Insurance Company also filed common written statement in both the cases wherein its seeks to avoid liability in absence of establishment of negligence on the part of driver of offending vehicle, however, it is admitted that at the relevant time, the offending vehicle was covered by an insurance policy issued by itself in favour of R-2. The averments of petition have been declined in toto.
ISSUES in MACT No. 746/2018(For Grant of Compensation in respect of the fatal injuries sustained by deceased Pawan Shah):
4. Vide order dated 28.05.2019, the following issues were framed by this Tribunal :-
1. Whether the deceased Sh.Pawan Shah suffered fatal injuries in an accident that took place on 27.07.2018 involving Truck (Contener) bearing registration No. UP-32-JN-
9953 driven by the Respondent No. 1 rashly and negligently, owned by the Respondent No. 2 and insured with the Respondent No. 3? OPP.
2. Whether the petitioners are entitled for compensation? If so, to what amount and from whom?
MACT No. 746/18 Rita Devi & Ors. Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors. Page No. 8/50MACT No. 744/18 Ram Lakhan Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors.
Digitally signed by PANKAJ SHARMAPANKAJ Date:
SHARMA 2023.12.08 12:54:18 +0530
3. Relief.
ISSUES in MACT No. 744/2018(For Grant of Compensation in respect of the injuries sustained by injured Ram Lakhan):
5. Vide order dated 28.05.2019, the following issues were framed by the Ld. Predecessor of this Tribunal :-
1. Whether Sh. Ram Lakhan suffered grievous injuries in an accident that took place on 27.07.2018 involving vehicle Truck (container) bearing registration No. UP-32-
JN-9953 driven by the respondent no. 1 rashly and negligently, owned by the Respondent No.2 and insured with the Respondent No.3? OPP.
2. Whether the petitioner is entitled for compensation? If so, to what amount and from whom?
3. Relief.
EVIDENCE in MACT No. 746/2018(For Grant of Compensation in respect of the fatal injuries sustained by deceased Pawan Shah):
6. The petitioner/LRs of deceased examined two witnesses including herself as PW-1 in her evidence in support of the claim.
Petitioner as PW-1 filed affidavit Ex. PW1/A MACT No. 746/18 Rita Devi & Ors. Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors. Page No. 9/50 MACT No. 744/18 Ram Lakhan Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors.
Digitally signed by PANKAJ SHARMAPANKAJ Date:
SHARMA 2023.12.08 12:54:22 +0530 wherein she described the occurrence of incident in line with the facts mentioned in Para 1 of this award. It is submitted that the injured/deceased Pawan was removed to LBRN Hospital, Lucknow from the place of accident and got admitted there and where the doctors declared him dead. It is submitted that the Post Mortem was also conducted at LBRN Hospital, Lucknow vide PMR No- PMR/3235/2018 dated 28.07.2018. It is submitted that he has spent about Rs.10,000/- on local conveyance, and he has also spent more than Rs.50,000/-on funeral rites. It is submitted that at the time of accident deceased Pawan was a self-employed as seller of Masala and earning about a sum of Rs.15,000/- P.M. It is submitted that the deceased was very much expert in his profession and his Income was increasing with the passage of time and very soon the deceased would have started earning around Rs. 20,000/- P.M to Rs 25,000/- P.M. It is submitted that the deceased had a very long life to go. It is submitted that the deceased was skilled in his work and the services and the deceased were in great demand. It is submitted that in all, the deceased was providing Rs.12,000/-P.M. to the petitioners in terms of direct financial support. It is submitted that the deceased was healthy person of just 44 years of age and was possessing sound health and good physique at the time of accident. It is submitted that his life was cut short due to the rash and negligent act of R-1. It is submitted that if deceased was not killed in the accident, he would have lived up to the aged of 80 years as there is a history of longevity of life in the family of the MACT No. 746/18 Rita Devi & Ors. Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors. Page No. 10/50 MACT No. 744/18 Ram Lakhan Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors.Digitally signed by PANKAJ SHARMA
PANKAJ Date:
SHARMA 2023.12.08 12:54:27 +0530 deceased. It is submitted that the deceased was a man of very simple habits. It is submitted that petitioner has suffered irreparable loss due to this accident. It is submitted that the deceased is survived by his parents. It is submitted that she is petitioner no. 1 / widow of the deceased and petitioner no. 2 & 3 are the daughters of the deceased and petitioner no. 4 & 5 are sons of the deceased and petitioner no. 6 is the father of deceased and petitioner no. 7 is mother of deceased. It is submitted that all the petitioners were totally dependents upon the income of the deceased. It is submitted that all the expenses of the petitioners were being met by the deceased from his income only. The deceased was also providing all the best amenities of the file to the petitioners. It is submitted that the accident was taken place due to the negligent driving of offending Cantener bearing No. UP-32-JN-9953. It is submitted that the police officials registered the case/FIR bearing No. 364/2018 under section 279/337/338/304-A IPC with police station Para, Lucknow and conducted investigation by the IO of this case. She has also relied upon the following documents:-
"Ex. PW1/1(OSR) is copy of Aadhaar Card of her deceased husband;
Ex. PW1/2(OSR) is death certificate of her deceased husband;
Ex.PW1/3(OSR) is copy of school leaving certificate of her deceased husband;
Ex. PW1/4 (Colly) are copies of Aadhaar Cards of other petitioners;MACT No. 746/18 Rita Devi & Ors. Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors. Page No. 11/50
MACT No. 744/18 Ram Lakhan Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors.Digitally signed by PANKAJ SHARMA
PANKAJ Date:
SHARMA 2023.12.08
12:54:31
+0530
Mark A is copy of PM report of her deceased husband; and Mark B (colly) are the copies of criminal records."
She was only cross-examined on behalf of respondent no. 3/Insurance Company. In her cross-examination, she deposed that she is a housewife and she is an illiterate. She deposed that she cannot read and write. She deposed that she knew the contents of her affidavit which were read over to her by her counsel. She affirmed that it bears her signatures at point A and B. She deposed that she signed her affidavit in the Chamber of her counsel. She deposed that she has not witnessed the accident. She deposed that some of her relative of her village informed her about the accident. She deposed that her deceased husband used to sell spices in daily local market. She deposed that her elder daughter is major but unmarried and another daughter and two sons are minor. She deposed that her husband was running a business of spices in weekly/daily market. She deposed that she did not have any income proof of her deceased husband. She deposed that all her children are studying. She denied the suggestion that her deceased husband was not working and earning a sum of Rs. 15,000/- per month. She deposed that she did not have place any document on record regarding the skilled knowledge of her deceased husband. She denied the suggestion that her deceased husband used to give her Rs. 12,000/- per month. She denied the suggestion that she MACT No. 746/18 Rita Devi & Ors. Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors. Page No. 12/50 MACT No. 744/18 Ram Lakhan Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors.Digitally signed by PANKAJ SHARMA
PANKAJ Date:
SHARMA 2023.12.08
12:54:36
+0530
mentioned the age of her deceased husband lesser than his actual age as mentioned in school leaving certificate. She denied the suggestion that no accident took place by R-1. She denied the suggestion that she has filed an exaggerated claim to seek the compensation from R-3/ Insurance Company.EVIDENCE in MACT No. 744/2018
(For Grant of Compensation in respect of the injuries sustained by injured Ram Lakhan):
7. The petitioner examined two witnesses including himself as PW-1 in his evidence in support of his claim.
Petitioner as PW-1 filed affidavit Ex. PW1/A wherein he described the occurrence of incident in line with the facts mentioned in Para 1 of this award. It is submitted that in the accident, he sustained the injuries viz. fracture in Right Leg, Abrasion Left Shoulder and Left Hand, Abrasion Left Ear & Cheek, Profusely bleeding Abrasion and blunt injuries all over body. He submitted that he remained admitted in LBRN Hospital, Lucknow and after that he was admitted in his native place Hospital Baba Ortho, Muzzaffarpur and he was still under active treatment. He submitted that he received serious/grievous injuries in the accident and he has suffered from permanent disability. He submitted that he has spent about Rs 10,000/- on local convevarce, Rs.25,000/- on special diet, Rs, 10,000/- on MACT No. 746/18 Rita Devi & Ors. Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors. Page No. 13/50 MACT No. 744/18 Ram Lakhan Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors.
Digitally signed by PANKAJ SHARMA PANKAJ Date:
SHARMA 2023.12.08
12:54:44
+0530
attendant charges and more than Rs.4,00,000/-on medical treatment. He submitted that at the time of accident, he is running a Shop and getting the Income of Rs 20,000/- P.M. He submitted that due to the injuries sustained by him in the accident, he could not work till that date. He submitted that the injured/ petitioner has suffered irreparable loss due to this accident and his future going to dark. He also relied upon the following documents:-
"Ex. PW1/1(OSR) is copy of his Aadhaar Card;
Ex. PW1/2 is disability certificate; Ex. PW1/3 (colly) is copy of his medical treatment papers;
Ex. PW1/4 (Colly) is medical bills; and Mark B (colly) is copy of criminal case records."
He was duly cross-examined on behalf of all the respondents. He deposed that prior to accident, he used to sell chhole kulche. He affirmed that he has not placed any proof of his profession and earning. He deposed that he boarded the bus bearing registration no. 2984 in Mujjaffar Pur on 27.07.2018 which was scheduled to reach Ghaziabad, UP on 28.07.2018. He deposed that at about 04.00 A.M, on 28.07.2018 in Lucknow, his bus met with an accident. He deposed that at the time, when accident took place, he was sleeping on his seat. He deposed that he did not see the accident. He deposed that when he awoke after the accident, he saw that people were crying. He deposed that MACT No. 746/18 Rita Devi & Ors. Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors. Page No. 14/50 MACT No. 744/18 Ram Lakhan Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors.
Digitally signed by PANKAJ SHARMA PANKAJ Date:
SHARMA 2023.12.08
12:54:54
+0530
public persons might have informed the police about the accident. He deposed that after half an hour, ambulance reached at the spot and took him to the hospital alongwith deceased Pawan. He deposed that police had recorded his statement in the hospital. He deposed that police never took him to the spot of accident after the accident. He deposed that no site plan was prepared at his instance. He deposed that he has placed on record the proof regarding conveyance charges, special diet, attendant charges and medical bills. He denied the suggestion that he has not spent Rs. 10,000/- towards conveyance, Rs. 25,000/- on special diet, Rs. 10,000/- on attendant Rs. 40,000/- on medical treatment. He denied the suggestion that he was treated in the government hospital. He volunteered that he was treated in the private hospital. He deposed that he has placed on record the medical prescriptions alongwith medical bills. He affirmed that he has not placed on record any document regarding the proof of his income. He denied the suggestion that he was not earning Rs.25,000/- per month. He affirmed that he has not got his shop registered nor obtained TAN number nor his shop was registered with Sales Tax. He denied the suggestion that he was not running any shop. He deposed that prior to this accident, his three left hand fingers were cut during the course of cutting of grass in the year 1993. He deposed that he is illiterate and can sign only. He deposed that he did not know the contents of his affidavit. He denied the suggestion that he is deposing falsely just to get compensation from R-3/ Insurance Company. He denied the MACT No. 746/18 Rita Devi & Ors. Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors. Page No. 15/50 MACT No. 744/18 Ram Lakhan Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors.
Digitally signed by PANKAJ SHARMA PANKAJ Date:
SHARMA 2023.12.08
12:54:59
+0530
suggestion that he has filed an exaggerated claim. He denied the suggestion that no accident took place by R-1.
CONSOLIDATION OF CASES FOR THE PURPOSE OF TRIAL AND DISPOSAL
8. Both the above matters were consolidated vide order dated 02.06.2023 and the matter for Grant of Compensation in respect of the fatal injuries sustained by deceased Sh. Pawan Kumar Shah i.e. MACT No. 746/18 was treated as a ''lead case.''
9. After consolidation of cases, petitioners have examined Md. Qasim @ Kasi Bari S/o Sh. Abdul Bari as PW-2 who stated that he is the petitioner in this case and was coming from Muzaffarpur to Delhi via Bus Bearing registered number UP 72 AT 2984. He submitted that he was the second driver of the said Bus and the alleged Bus was driving by Sujeet Kumar Pandey. He submitted that bus was walking towards Muzaffarpur on dated 27.07.2018 and when reached at on 28.07.2018 at 04:00 AM, in front of Thana Gate beat no. Hans Khera, P.S Para, Lucknow, the container Bearing No. UP 32-JN-9953 being driven by R-1 at very high speed rashly, negligently, without caution and without blowing horn and forceful hit the aforesaid bus. He submitted that as a result of this forceful hit/ collapse with bus and container and due to the forceful impact of above accident, many passengers of the Bus sustained serious/ grievous MACT No. 746/18 Rita Devi & Ors. Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors. Page No. 16/50 MACT No. 744/18 Ram Lakhan Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors.
Digitally signed by PANKAJ PANKAJ SHARMA SHARMA Date:
2023.12.08 12:55:04 +0530 injuries all over his bodies and from a police official came into his knowledge that one person have died at the same. He submitted that the accident was taken place due to the negligent driving of offending Container bearing Reg. no- UP 32-JN 9953. He submitted that the police officials registered the case/FIR bearing no. 364/2018, under section 279/304-A IPC with police station Para, U.P., and conducted investigation by the IO of this case. He submitted that the present affidavit has been drafted by his Counsel under his instructions and the contents of the same have been read over and explained to him in his vernacular language which is true and correct.
He was duly cross-examined on behalf of respondent no. 3/ Insurance Company. During his cross-examination, he deposed that he studied till 6th or 7th class. He deposed that he knew the contents of his affidavit. He deposed that he is not the petitioner in the present case. He deposed that he was the co- driver(second driver) of vehicle no. UP-72AT-2984. He deposed that he had the requisite power attending for being the second driver of the vehicle, however, he did not have the same as of now. He deposed that but he can produce the same, if so directed. He deposed that at the time of accident, he was sitting on the conductor's side i.e. left side. He deposed that he was standing in the bus as the road was very narrow. He deposed that the container hit their bus from the front side. He affirmed that there was head on collision as container was coming from wrong side.MACT No. 746/18 Rita Devi & Ors. Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors. Page No. 17/50
MACT No. 744/18 Ram Lakhan Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors.
Digitally
signed by
PANKAJ
PANKAJ SHARMA
SHARMA Date:
2023.12.08
12:55:09
+0530
He deposed that there was no divider on the road. He deposed that the road was about 45-50 feet wide. He deposed that he sustained simple injury in the accident. He deposed that he was conscious at that time. He deposed that police came within no time as there was a police station near to the spot. He deposed that his statement was not recorded by the police regarding the accident. He deposed that in his presence, police did not prepare any site plan. He deposed that the bus was coming from Muzaffarpur, Bihar to Delhi. He affirmed that the bus was not having a valid permit of Delhi and Bihar. He denied the suggestion that he was not the attending driver in the said bus nor eye witness to the accident. He deposed that he received summons from Court at his native place. He affirmed that he is appearing as he was asked to come as a witness by the counsel of the petitioner. He denied the suggestion that he is deposing falsely to favour the petitioner.
10. In the present case, respondents have not led any evidence despite given opportunities.
FINDINGS
11. Oral submissions were advanced by Ld. Counsel for the parties.
12. I have perused the record and my issue wise findings MACT No. 746/18 Rita Devi & Ors. Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors. Page No. 18/50 MACT No. 744/18 Ram Lakhan Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors.
Digitally signed by PANKAJ SHARMA PANKAJ Date:
SHARMA 2023.12.08
12:55:14
+0530
are as under:-
ISSUE NO. 1 in MACT No. 746/2018
(For Grant of Compensation in respect of the fatal injuries sustained by deceased Pawan Shah):
"Whether the deceased Sh.Pawan Shah suffered fatal injuries in an accident that took place on 27.07.2018 involving Truck (Container) bearing registration No. UP-32- JN-9953 driven by the Respondent No. 1 rashly and negligently, owned by the Respondent No. 2 and insured with the Respondent No. 3? OPP."
ISSUE No. 1 in MACT No. 744/2018 (For Grant of Compensation in respect of the injuries sustained by injured Ram Lakhan):
"Whether the petitioner Sh. Ram Lakhan suffered grievous injuries in an accident that took place on 27.07.2018 involving vehicle Truck (container) bearing registration No. UP-32-JN-9953 driven by the respondent no. 1 rashly and negligently, owned by the Respondent No.2 and insured with the Respondent No.3?OPP."
13. At the very outset, it may be noted that the procedure followed for proceedings conducted by an accident tribunal is similar to that followed by a civil court and in civil matters the facts are required to be established by preponderance of probabilities only and not by strict rules of evidence or beyond reasonable doubts, as are required in a criminal prosecution. The MACT No. 746/18 Rita Devi & Ors. Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors. Page No. 19/50 MACT No. 744/18 Ram Lakhan Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors.
Digitally
signed by
PANKAJ
PANKAJ SHARMA
SHARMA Date:
2023.12.08
12:55:19
+0530
burden of proof in a civil case is never as heavy as in a criminal case, but in a claim petition under the M.V. Act, this burden is infact even lesser than that in a civil case. Reference in this regard can be made to the prepositions of law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Bimla Devi and others Vs. Himachal Road Transport Corporation and others, reported in (2009) 13 SC 530, which were reiterated in the subsequent judgment in the case of Parmeshwari Vs. Amir Chand and others 2011 (1) SCR 1096(Civil Appeal No.1082 of 2011) and also recently in another case Mangla Ram Vs. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. & Ors., 2018 Law Suit (SC) 303 etc.
14. In order to prove the present issue, petitioners examined eye witness namely Md. Qasim @ Kasi Bari S/o Sh.Abdul Bari as PW-2 in the lead case who stated that he was coming from Muzaffarpur to Delhi via Bus Bearing registered number UP 72 AT 2984. He submitted that he was the second driver of the said Bus and the alleged Bus was driving by Sujeet Kumar Pandey. He submitted that bus was walking towards Muzaffarpur on dated 27.07.2018 and when reached at on 28.07.2018 at 04:00 AM, in front of Thana Gate beat no. Hans Khera, P.S Para, Lucknow, the container Bearing No. UP 32-JN- 9953 being driven by R-1 at very high speed rashly, negligently, without caution and without blowing horn and forceful hit the MACT No. 746/18 Rita Devi & Ors. Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors. Page No. 20/50 MACT No. 744/18 Ram Lakhan Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors.
Digitally signed by PANKAJ SHARMAPANKAJ Date:
SHARMA 2023.12.08 12:55:24 +0530 aforesaid bus. He submitted that as a result of this forceful hit/ collapse with bus and container and due to the forceful impact of above accident, many passengers of the Bus sustained serious/ grievous injuries all over his bodies and from a police official came into his knowledge that one person have died at the same. He submitted that the accident was taken place due to the negligent driving of offending Container bearing Reg. no- UP 32- JN 9953. A bare perusal of cross-examination of PW-2 by R-3 clearly reflects that he was able to respond to their queries in a satisfactory manner, consistent with the case of the petitioner/s. PW-2 has declined the suggestions imputing the occurrence of accident to the negligence of deceased. In totality, it could be safely observed here that PW-2 has withstood the test of cross- examination as he has not betrayed any signs of falsity or inconsistency and therefore, his testimony is worth acting upon.
15. The very fact that R-1 has already been charge-
sheeted for the offences punishable under Sections 279/337/338/304A IPC in the above criminal case/FIR in itself is a strong circumstance to support the above oral testimony of PW-2 and the case of petitioner/s on these issues. The copies of FIR, Chargesheet, Site plan, Mechanical inspection report of offending vehicle, MLC, Postmortem Report of deceased, Seizure Memos and Arrest Memo of R-1 also corroborate the oral testimony of PW-2.
MACT No. 746/18 Rita Devi & Ors. Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors. Page No. 21/50MACT No. 744/18 Ram Lakhan Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors.
Digitally
signed by
PANKAJ
PANKAJ SHARMA
SHARMA Date:
2023.12.08
12:55:28
+0530
16. Besides the above, R-1 himself was the best witness who could have stepped into the witness box to challenge the deposition being made by injured regarding the above accident and its manner etc., but he has not done so. Therefore, an adverse inference on this aspect is also required to be drawn against the respondents in view of the law laid down in case of Cholamandalam M.S. General Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Kamlesh, reported in 2009 (3) AD (Delhi) 310.
17. In view of the above, it could be safely assumed that at the relevant time the offending vehicle was being driven by R-1 in a rash and negligent manner.
18. This Tribunal now proceeds to assess the wrongful act, neglect or default of R-1, if any, in driving the offending vehicle at the relevant time. Admittedly, R-1 has not explained the circumstances under which his vehicle (i.e. the offending vehicle) hit the bus in which the deceased and the injured were travelling at the relevant time. In the absence of any averment or evidence regarding any mechanical defect in the offending vehicle or any material depicting any negligent/sudden act or omission on the part of the deceased, the only inference possible in the given facts and circumstances is that of neglect and default on the part of R-1 in driving the offending vehicle at the relevant time.
MACT No. 746/18 Rita Devi & Ors. Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors. Page No. 22/50MACT No. 744/18 Ram Lakhan Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors.
Digitally
signed by
PANKAJ
PANKAJ SHARMA
SHARMA Date:
2023.12.08
12:55:33
+0530
19. In view of the Postmortem Report/ death certificate/ medical records placed on the judicial files by the respective petitioner/s, no dispute is left regarding the death of the deceased and the nature of injuries sustained by the injured Ram Lakhan in the above accident.
20. In view of the above discussion, this Tribunal holds that the deceased died and the injured Ram Lakhan suffered grievous injuries on his person on account of neglect and default of R-1 while driving the offending vehicle at the relevant time. Both these issues are thus decided against the respondents and in favour of the petitioner/s in both the cases.
ISSUE NO. 2 ( IN BOTH THE MATTERS ) "Whether the petitioner/ petitioners are entitled for compensation? If so, to what amount and from whom?
21. As this Tribunal has already held that R1 was responsible for the fatal injuries sustained by the deceased and for the grievous injuries sustained by the injured, therefore, the petitioner/s in both the cases are entitled to be compensated justly. Computation of the compensation shall be decided separately for both the sets of petitioner/s in the following MACT No. 746/18 Rita Devi & Ors. Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors. Page No. 23/50 MACT No. 744/18 Ram Lakhan Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors.
Digitally
signed by
PANKAJ
PANKAJ SHARMA
SHARMA Date:
2023.12.08
12:55:39
+0530
paragraphs :-
COMPENSATION IN MACT No. 746/18
(For Grant of Compensation in respect of the fatal injuries of deceased Pawan Shah) :
22. The compensation to which the petitioners are entitled shall be under the following heads:-
(i) LOSS OF DEPENDENCY
23. In this regard, the petitioners have examined Petitioner no. 1 as PW1 who is the wife of deceased. PW-1 deposed that at the relevant time, the deceased was 44 years old and was self employed as seller of Masala and earning a sum of Rs. 15,000/- per month. However, there is no material available on record which could corroborate the claim of PW-1 as to the monthly earnings of the deceased except one school leaving certificate. PW-1 also filed on record Aadhaar Card of deceased which shows that the deceased used to reside in Delhi. Accordingly, in the facts and circumstances, it would be appropriate to assess the monthly income of the deceased as per the minimum wages payable to a Non-Matriculate Person in Delhi at the time of accident i.e. 28.07.2018 were Rs.15,296/- per month.
MACT No. 746/18 Rita Devi & Ors. Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors. Page No. 24/50MACT No. 744/18 Ram Lakhan Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors. Digitally signed by PANKAJ PANKAJ SHARMA SHARMA Date:
2023.12.08 12:55:44 +0530
24. Petitioners have claimed that the deceased was aged about 44 years at the time of his death. They have placed on record the copy of Aadhar Card of deceased, Ex. PW-1/1, as per which the date of birth of deceased is 03.05.1974. The date of accident is 28.07.2018. Going by the said records, the age of deceased would be around 44 years as on the date of accident. Hence, in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Sarla Verma & Ors. Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation & Anr., (2009) 6 SCC 121, which has also been upheld by the Constitutional Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi & Ors. SLP (Civil) No. 25590 of 2014, decided on 31.10.2017, the multiplier of '14' is held applicable for calculating the loss of dependency caused to the petitioners on account of death of the deceased.
25. Coming to the dependency of deceased at the time of accident, it is observed that the deceased was survived only by his wife and four children who shall be treated as dependent upon the deceased.
26. Irrespective of this, one fourth of the earnings of deceased shall be deducted towards his personal and living expenses in view of the law already discussed above. Further, since this Tribunal has assumed that the age of deceased was 44 years at the time of accident., in view of the law laid down in the MACT No. 746/18 Rita Devi & Ors. Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors. Page No. 25/50 MACT No. 744/18 Ram Lakhan Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors. Digitally signed by PANKAJ PANKAJ SHARMA SHARMA Date:
2023.12.08 12:55:50 +0530 case of Pranay Sethi & Ors. (Supra), the petitioner is also held entitled to an addition of 25% of the above amount of his earnings towards future prospects.
27. Thus, the loss of dependency qua the deceased in the present case comes to Rs.24,09,120/- (Rs.15,296/- X 125/100 X 3/4 X 14 X 12). This amount is awarded to the petitioners under this head.
(ii) COMPENSATION UNDER NON-PECUNIARY HEADS
28. In terms of propositions laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajwati @ Rajjo & Ors. Vs. United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Civil Appeal No. 8179/2022 decided on 09/12/2022, the petitioners are also held entitled to amount of Rs.20,000/- each under the heads of loss of estate and funeral expenses. Further, in view of subsequent judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of United India Insurance Company Ltd Vs Satinder Kaur & Ors MANU/HC/0500/2020 and The New India Assurance Company Ltd & Ors Vs Somwati & Ors MANU/HC/0674/2020, the petitioners are also entitled to compensation under the head "loss of consortium": -
Spousal Consortium : Rs. 44,000/- (Rs. 44,000/- X 1) Parental Consortium : Rs. 1,76,000/- (Rs. 44,000/- X 4) MACT No. 746/18 Rita Devi & Ors. Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors. Page No. 26/50 MACT No. 744/18 Ram Lakhan Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors. Digitally signed by PANKAJ PANKAJ SHARMA SHARMA Date:
2023.12.08 12:55:54 +0530 Since parents of the deceased passed away during the pendency of the petition, therefore, no filial compensation is granted.
Hence, the petitioners are awarded a total sum of Rs. 2,60,000/- (Rs.20,000/- + 20,000/- + Rs. 2,20,000/-) under this head.
COMPENSATION in MACT No. 744/2018 (For Grant of Compensation in respect of the injuries sustained by injured Ram Lakhan):
29. In terms of provisions contained in Section 168 of the MV Act the compensation which is to be awarded by this tribunal is required to be 'just'. In the injury cases a claimant is entitled to two different kinds of compensations i.e. pecuniary as well as non-pecuniary damages. The pecuniary damages or special damages are those damages which are awarded and designed to make good the losses which are capable of being calculated in terms of money and the object of awarding these damages is to indemnify the claimant for the expenses which he had already incurred or is likely to incur in respect of the injuries suffered by him in the accident. The non-pecuniary or general damages are those damages which are incapable of being assessed by arithmetical calculations. The pecuniary or special damages generally include the expenses incurred by the claimant towards his treatment, special diet, conveyance, cost of nursing/ MACT No. 746/18 Rita Devi & Ors. Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors. Page No. 27/50 MACT No. 744/18 Ram Lakhan Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors. Digitally signed by PANKAJ PANKAJ SHARMA SHARMA Date:
2023.12.08 12:55:59 +0530 attendant, loss of income/earning capacity etc. and the non- pecuniary damages generally include the compensation for the mental or physical shock, pain and sufferings, loss of amenities of life, marriage prospects and disfiguration etc. The above categories falling under both the heads of compensation are not exhaustive in nature but only illustrative. It is also necessary to state here that no amount of money or compensation can put the injured/claimant exactly in the same position or place where he was before the accident and an effort is to be made only to reasonably compensate him or to put him almost in the same place or position where he could have been if the alleged accident had not taken place and this compensation is to be assessed in a fair, reasonable and equitable manner. The object of compensating him is also not to reward him or to make him rich in an unjust manner. It is also well settled that the 'just' compensation to be awarded to the claimant has to be calculated objectively and it may involve some guess work in calculating the different amounts which the claimant may be entitled under the different heads of compensation. Reference in this regard can be made on some of important judgments on the subject like the judgment in the case of R.D. Hattangadi Vs. Pest Control (India) Pvt. Ltd., AIR 1995 SC 755, Arvind Kumar Mishra Vs. New India Assurance Company Limited, (2010) 10 SCC 254 and Raj Kumar Vs. Ajay Kumar & Anr., (2011) 1 SCC
343. MACT No. 746/18 Rita Devi & Ors. Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors. Page No. 28/50
MACT No. 744/18 Ram Lakhan Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors. Digitally signed by PANKAJ PANKAJ SHARMA SHARMA Date:
2023.12.08 12:56:04 +0530
30. In light of the above legal propositions, the amount of compensation which could be considered to be 'just' in the opinion of this tribunal shall be as under:-
(i) Medical or Treatment Expenses
31. The petitioner has placed on judicial file his medical bills, which are Ex. PW1/4(colly). As per the said documents, petitioner has incurred expenses to the tune of Rs.9,446/-. In the absence of any contest to the said documents (placed on record by the petitioner), the petitioner is held entitled to an amount of Rs.9,446/- under this head.
(ii) Pain and Suffering
32. As discussed above, as per medical documents, the injured sustained grievous injuries. It is not possible to quantify the compensation admissible to injured for the shock, pain and sufferings etc. which he actually suffered because of the above injuries, but as stated above, 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 injured and duration of the treatment taken by him etc., an amount of Rs.25,000/- is being awarded to him towards pain and sufferings.
(iii) Loss of actual earnings MACT No. 746/18 Rita Devi & Ors. Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors. Page No. 29/50 MACT No. 744/18 Ram Lakhan Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors. Digitally signed by PANKAJ PANKAJ SHARMA SHARMA Date:
2023.12.08 12:56:09 +0530
33. In his affidavit Ex. PW1/A, the petitioner claims that he was running a shop and earning Rs.20,000/- per month. The medical documents reflects that the petitioner sustained a grievous injuries. In view of the above facts, it can be assumed that the petitioner would have been rendered unfit to resume his work for a period of six months at least after the accident. In the absence of any corroborative material supporting the claim of the petitioner as to his employment or his monthly earnings, it would be appropriate that the monthly income of petitioner be assessed as per the minimum wages payable to an unskilled person in Delhi as on the date of accident(petitioner being an ordinary resident of Delhi at the relevant time). As per relevant notification, the minimum wages admissible to an unskilled person as on 28.07.2018 in Delhi were Rs.13,896/-. As such, the petitioner is held entitled to a sum of Rs.83,376/- (Rs.13,896 X
06). The said sum is awarded to the petitioner under this head.
(iv) Loss of future earnings due to disability
34. Petitioner claimed in his affidavit Ex. PW1/A that he has become permanently disabled after the accident. Admittedly, petitioner has suffered 35% permanent physical impairment with respect to his right lower limb. The above disability has certainly compromised his earning capacity of future. The above disability would definitely hamper his earning capacity in future. As per the record, petitioner was running a shop and the permanent disability sustained by him in his right MACT No. 746/18 Rita Devi & Ors. Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors. Page No. 30/50 MACT No. 744/18 Ram Lakhan Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors. Digitally signed by PANKAJ PANKAJ SHARMA SHARMA Date:
2023.12.08 12:56:18 +0530 lower limb to the extent of 35% would certainly reduced his earning capacity. Therefore, in the absence of any material to the contrary, it would be appropriate to hold that the functional disability of petitioner be assessed at 25%. As far as the age of petitioner at the time of accident is concerned, we may look into the photocopies of petitioner's Aadhar Card; as per which, the date of birth of petitioner is 01.01.1968. Going by the same, the age of petitioner as on the date of accident i.e. 28.07.2018 was 50 years. Therefore, in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Sarla Verma & Ors. Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation & Anr.,(2009) 6 SCC 121, which has also been upheld by the Constitution Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in a recent judgment dated 31.10.2017 given in the case of National Insurance Company Ltd. vs. Pranay Sethi & Ors. SLP (Civil) No. 25590 of 2014, the multiplier of '13' is held applicable for calculating the loss of future earnings of petitioner arising out of his above disability. The petitioner is also entitled to 25% future prospects as per the observations made by a Three Judge Bench of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Erudhaya Priya Vs. State Express Transport Corporation Ltd., MANU/SC/0545/2020 [please see para 7 (b)]. Thus, the loss of future earnings of petitioner due to his above injury and permanent disability comes to Rs.6,77,430/- (Rs.13,896/- X 25/100 X 125/100 X 13 X 12) and the same is awarded to him as compensation under this head.MACT No. 746/18 Rita Devi & Ors. Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors. Page No. 31/50
MACT No. 744/18 Ram Lakhan Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors. Digitally signed by PANKAJ PANKAJ SHARMA SHARMA Date:
2023.12.08 12:56:25 +0530
(iv) Conveyance, Attendant Charges and Special Diet
35. In view of the nature of injuries sustained by the petitioner, the extent of permanent physical disability and the extended period of medical treatment, the petitioner is granted a sum of Rs. 25,000/- each under these heads.
(v) Loss of amenities of life and disfigurement
36. In view of the nature of injuries sustained by the petitioner, the extent of permanent physical disability and the extended period of medical treatment, the petitioner is granted a sum of Rs. 25,000/- each under these heads.
ISSUE NO.3 / RELIEF
37. The petitioners (in MACT No. 746/2018 (For Grant of Compensation in respect of the fatal injuries sustained by deceased Pawan Shah) are thus awarded a sum of Rs.26,69,120/- (Rupees Twenty Six Lacs Sixty Nine Thousand One Hundred Twenty Only) (Rs.24,09,120/- + Rs.2,60,000/-) along with interest @ 8% per annum from the date of filing of DAR i.e. 17.09.2018. Since no interim compensation has been awarded, therefore no deduction is applicable.
38. The injured (in MACT No. 744/2018 (For Grant of Compensation in respect of the injuries sustained by injured Ram Lakhan) is thus awarded a sum of Rs.9,20,252/- (Rupees Nine MACT No. 746/18 Rita Devi & Ors. Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors. Page No. 32/50 MACT No. 744/18 Ram Lakhan Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors. Digitally signed by PANKAJ PANKAJ SHARMA SHARMA Date:
2023.12.08 12:56:31 +0530 Lacs Twenty Thousand Two Hundred Fifty Two Only) (Rs.9,446/- + Rs. 25,000/- + Rs. 83,376/- + Rs. 6,77,430/- + Rs.25,000/- + Rs.25,000/- + Rs.25,000/- + Rs.25,000/- + Rs.25,000/-) along with interest @ 8% per annum from the date of filing of DAR i.e. 17.09.2018. Since no interim compensation has been awarded, therefore no deduction is applicable.RELEASE in MACT No. 744/2018
(For Grant of Compensation in respect of the injuries sustained by injured Ram Lakhan):
39. On 19.12.2022, joint statement of petitioners qua financial needs and requirements were recorded in terms of Central Motor Vehicles (fifth Amendment) Rules, 2022 [(Directions at serial no. 32 of Procedure for Investigation of Motor Vehicle Accidents (under Rule 150A)]. As per their statements, their household expenditures are Rs.20,000/- per month respectively. Photocopy of the passbook of the bank account of the petitioners maintained with Punjab National Bank, Branch : Bhusra, Distt. Muzaffarpur, was also placed on record at that time. Photocopies of Aadhar Cards of all the petitioners and PAN Card of petitioner no. 1 & 3 were also placed on record by the petitioners, apart from one coloured photographs of each petitioner.
39.1 Out of the awarded amount, Petitioner No. 1 is MACT No. 746/18 Rita Devi & Ors. Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors. Page No. 33/50 MACT No. 744/18 Ram Lakhan Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors. Digitally signed by PANKAJ PANKAJ SHARMA SHARMA Date:
2023.12.08 12:56:37 +0530 awarded a sum of Rs. 20,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty Lacs Only) and the said amount is directed to be kept with State Bank of India, Branch Tis Hazari Courts, New Delhi in MACAD in the form of 100 monthly fixed deposit receipts (FDRs) payable in equal amounts for a period of 1 to 100 months in succession, as per the scheme formulated by Central Motor Vehicles (fifth Amendment) Rules, 2022 [(Directions at serial no. 35, 36 of Procedure for Investigation of Motor Vehicle Accidents (under Rule 150A)]. The amount of FDRs on maturity would be released in her savings/MACT Claims SB Account bearing No. 2585001700485014, IFSC Code - PUNB0258500 maintained with Punjab National Bank, Branch - Bhusra, Distt. Muzaffarpur, Delhi (PAN No. CWEPD4479C). The remaining amount of Rs.2,63,417/- (Rupees Two Lacs Sixty Three Thousand Four Hundred Seventeen only) is also directed to be released into her above said account, which can be withdrawn and utilized by the petitioner no. 1.
39.2 Out of the awarded amount, Petitioner No. 2 is awarded a sum of Rs.3,40,000/- (Rupees Three Lacs Forty Thousand Only) and the said amount is directed to be kept with State Bank of India, Branch Tis Hazari Courts, New Delhi in MACAD in the form of 34 monthly fixed deposit receipts (FDRs) payable in equal amounts for a period of 1 to 34 months in succession, as per the scheme formulated by Central Motor Vehicles (fifth Amendment) Rules, 2022 [(Directions at serial MACT No. 746/18 Rita Devi & Ors. Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors. Page No. 34/50 MACT No. 744/18 Ram Lakhan Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors. Digitally signed by PANKAJ PANKAJ SHARMA SHARMA Date:
2023.12.08 12:56:44 +0530 no. 35, 36 of Procedure for Investigation of Motor Vehicle Accidents (under Rule 150A)]. The amount of FDRs on maturity would be released in her savings/MACT Claims SB Account bearing No. 2585000100181010, IFSC Code - PUNB0258500 maintained with Punjab National Bank, Branch - Bhusra, Distt. Muzaffarpur, Delhi. The remaining amount of Rs.37,485/- (Rupees Thirty Seven Thousand Four Hundred Eighty Five only) is also directed to be released into her above said account, which can be withdrawn and utilized by the petitioner no. 2.
39.3 Out of the awarded amount, Petitioner No. 3 is awarded a sum of Rs.3,40,000/- (Rupees Three Lacs Forty Thousand Only) and the said amount is directed to be kept with State Bank of India, Branch Tis Hazari Courts, New Delhi in MACAD in the form of 34 monthly fixed deposit receipts (FDRs) payable in equal amounts for a period of 1 to 34 months in succession, as per the scheme formulated by Central Motor Vehicles (fifth Amendment) Rules, 2022 [(Directions at serial no. 35, 36 of Procedure for Investigation of Motor Vehicle Accidents (under Rule 150A)]. The amount of FDRs on maturity would be released in her savings/MACT Claims SB Account bearing No. 2585001700448341, IFSC Code -
PUNB0258500 maintained with Punjab National Bank, Branch - Bhusra, Distt. Muzaffarpur, Delhi. The remaining amount of Rs.37,485/- (Rupees Thirty Seven Thousand Four Hundred MACT No. 746/18 Rita Devi & Ors. Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors. Page No. 35/50 MACT No. 744/18 Ram Lakhan Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors. Digitally signed by PANKAJ PANKAJ SHARMA SHARMA Date:
2023.12.08 12:56:51 +0530 Eighty Five only) is also directed to be released into her above said account, which can be withdrawn and utilized by the petitioner no. 3.
39.4 Out of the awarded amount, Petitioner No. 4 is awarded a sum of Rs.3,40,000/- (Rupees Three Lacs Fourty Thousand Only) and the said amount is directed to be kept with State Bank of India, Branch Tis Hazari Courts, New Delhi in MACAD in the form of 34 monthly fixed deposit receipts (FDRs) payable in equal amounts for a period of 1 to 34 months in succession, as per the scheme formulated by Central Motor Vehicles (fifth Amendment) Rules, 2022 [(Directions at serial no. 35, 36 of Procedure for Investigation of Motor Vehicle Accidents (under Rule 150A)]. The amount of FDRs on maturity would be released in his savings/MACT Claims SB Account bearing No. 2585000100227701, IFSC Code -
PUNB0258500 maintained with Punjab National Bank, Branch - Bhusra, Distt. Muzaffarpur, Delhi. The remaining amount of Rs.37,485/- (Rupees Thirty Seven Thousand Four Hundred Eighty Five only) is also directed to be released into his above said account, which can be withdrawn and utilized by the petitioner no. 4.
39.5 Rs.3,77,485/- be kept in FDRs in the name of Petitioner No. 5 till he attains majority with cumulative interest. On attaining majority, the bank shall release the MACT No. 746/18 Rita Devi & Ors. Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors. Page No. 36/50 MACT No. 744/18 Ram Lakhan Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors. Digitally signed by PANKAJ PANKAJ SHARMA SHARMA Date:
2023.12.08 12:56:56 +0530 interest portion to Petitioner No. 5 by transferring the same to his savings bank account as and when he furnishes the details of his bank account which is near the place of his residence to the Bank Manager, State Bank of India, Tis Hazari Courts, New Delhi under intimation to the Civil Nazir of this Tribunal and the principal amount of Rs. 3,77,485/- each be kept in 37 FDRs of Rs. 10,000/- each for a period of 1 month to 37 months with cumulative interest in the name of Petitioner No. 5.RELEASE in MACT No. 744/2018
(For Grant of Compensation in respect of the injuries sustained by injured Ram Lakhan):
40. On 19.12.2022, statement of petitioner qua financial needs and requirements was recorded in terms of Central Motor Vehicles (fifth Amendment) Rules, 2022 [(Directions at serial no. 32 of Procedure for Investigation of Motor Vehicle Accidents (under Rule 150A)]. As per his statement, his household expenditure is Rs.20,000/- per month. Photocopy of the passbook of the bank account of the petitioner maintained with Punjab National Bank, Branch : Burari, Delhi, was also placed on record at that time. Photocopy of Aadhar Card was also placed on record by the injured, apart from two coloured photographs of the petitioner.
MACT No. 746/18 Rita Devi & Ors. Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors. Page No. 37/50 MACT No. 744/18 Ram Lakhan Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors. Digitally signed by PANKAJ PANKAJ SHARMA SHARMA Date: 2023.12.08 12:57:02 +0530
41. Out of the awarded amount, a sum of Rs.11,50,000/- (Rupees Eleven Lacs Fifty Thousand only) is directed to be kept with State Bank of India, Branch Tis Hazari Courts, New Delhi in MACAD in the form of 115 monthly fixed deposit receipts (FDRs) payable in equal amounts for a period of 1 to 115 months in succession, as per the scheme formulated by Central Motor Vehicles (fifth Amendment) Rules, 2022 [(Directions at serial no. 35, 36 of Procedure for Investigation of Motor Vehicle Accidents (under Rule 150A)]. The amount of FDRs on maturity would be released in his savings/MACT Claims Bank Account bearing No. 1051000100411240, IFSC Code - PUNB0105100, maintained with Punjab National Bank, Branch - Burari, Delhi, on monthly basis. The remaining amount of Rs.1,50,623/- (Rupees One Lac Fifty Thousand Six Hundred Twenty Three Only) is also directed to be released into his above said account, which can be withdrawn and utilized by the petitioner.
LIABILITY
42. As already stated above, R-1 being the driver and principal tortfeasor and R-2 being owner of the offending vehicle, and also being vicariously liable for the acts of R-1, are jointly and severally liable to pay the awarded amount of compensation to petitioner/s. However, since the offending vehicle was insured with R-3 at the time of accident, therefore, R-3/ Insurance Company is liable to indemnify R-2 in respect of MACT No. 746/18 Rita Devi & Ors. Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors. Page No. 38/50 MACT No. 744/18 Ram Lakhan Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors.
Digitally
signed by
PANKAJ
PANKAJ SHARMA
SHARMA Date:
2023.12.08
12:57:08
+0530
above liability. As such R-3 is directed to deposit the above award amount within 30 days from the date of this Award by way of NEFT or RTGS mode in the account of this Tribunal maintained with SBI, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi (account holder's name-Motor Accident Claims Tribunal 02 Central, A/C No. 40743576901, IFSC Code SBIN0000726) under intimation to the petitioners and this Tribunal in terms of the format for remittance of compensation as provided in Divisional Manager Vs. Rajesh, 2016 SCC Online Mad. 1913 (and reiterated by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the orders dated 16.03.2021 and 16.11.2021 titled as Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India & Ors) along with interest @ 8% per annum till the deposit of the compensation as awarded, failing which it shall be liable to pay interest at the rate of 12% per annum for the period of delay.
43. A digital copy of this award be forwarded to the parties free of cost. Ahlmad is directed to send the copy of the award to Ld. Metropolitan Magistrate concerned and Delhi Legal Services Authority in view of Central Motor Vehicles (fifth Amendment) Rules, 2022 [(Directions at serial nos. 39, 40 of Procedure for Investigation of Motor Vehicle Accidents (under Rule 150A)]. Further Nazir is directed to maintain the record in Form XVIII in view of Central Motor Vehicles (fifth Amendment) Rules, 2022 [(Directions at serial no. 41 of Procedure for Investigation of Motor Vehicle Accidents (under MACT No. 746/18 Rita Devi & Ors. Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors. Page No. 39/50 MACT No. 744/18 Ram Lakhan Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors. Digitally signed by PANKAJ PANKAJ SHARMA SHARMA Date:
2023.12.08 12:57:14 +0530 Rule 150A).
44. Ahlmad is directed to e-mail an authenticated copy of the award to the insurer as directed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in WP (Civil) No. 534/2020 titled as Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India & Ors. on 16.03.2021. Ahlmad shall also e-mail an authenticated copy of the award to Branch Manager, SBI, Tis Hazari Courts for information.
45. Ahlmad is further directed to comply with the directions passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in MAC APP No. 10/2021 titled as New India Assurance Company Ltd. Vs. Sangeeta Vaid & Ors., date of decision : 06.01.2021 regarding digitization of the records.
File be consigned to Record Room.
A separate file be prepared for compliance report Digitally signed and put up the same on 09.01.2024. by PANKAJ SHARMA PANKAJ Date:
SHARMA 2023.12.08
12:57:19
+0530
Announced in the open court (DR. PANKAJ SHARMA) On this 08.12.2023 Judge, MACT-02 (CENTRAL) Delhi MACT No. 746/18 Rita Devi & Ors. Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors. Page No. 40/50 MACT No. 744/18 Ram Lakhan Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors. FORM - XV, Central Motor Vehicles (fifth Amendment) Rules, 2022 (Pl. see Rule 150A) SUMMARY OF COMPUTATION OF AWARD AMOUNT IN DEATH CASES
1. Date of accident. : 28.07.2018
2. Name of the deceased : Sh. Pawan Shah
3. Age of the deceased : 44 years
4. Occupation of the deceased : Self Employed
5. Income of the deceased : Assessed on the basis of minimum wages payable to an non-matriculate Person in Delhi at the relevant time.
6. Name, age and relationship of legal representative of deceased:-
S. Name Age Relation No. (1) Rita Devi 34 Years Wife of the deceased (2) Krishna Kumari 17 Years Daughter of the MACT No. 746/18 Rita Devi & Ors. Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors. Page No. 41/50 MACT No. 744/18 Ram Lakhan Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors. Digitally signed by PANKAJ PANKAJ SHARMA SHARMA Date: 2023.12.08 12:57:24 +0530 deceased (3) Kiran Kumari 15 Years Daughter of the deceased (4) Nitish Kumar 13 Years Son of the deceased (5) Abhishek Kumar 12 Years Son of the deceased Computation of Compensation Sr. Heads Awarded by the Claims Tribunal No. 7. Income of the Rs.15,296/- per month deceased(A) 8. Add-Future 25% Prospects (B) 9. Less-Personal One Fourth deduction has been expenses of the done deceased(C) 10. Monthly loss of Rs. 14,340/- dependency[(A+B)- MACT No. 746/18 Rita Devi & Ors. Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors. Page No. 42/50 MACT No. 744/18 Ram Lakhan Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors. Digitally signed by PANKAJ PANKAJ SHARMA SHARMA Date: 2023.12.08 12:57:28 +0530 C=D] 11. Annual loss of Rs.1,72,080/- dependency (Dx12) (Rs.14,340/- x 12) 12. Multiplier(E) '14' 13. Total loss of Rs. 24,09,120/-(rounded off) dependency (Dx12xE= F) 14. Medical NIL Expenses(G) 15. Compensation for Rs. 44,000/- (Rs. 44,000X1) loss of consortium(H) Rs. 1,76,000/- (Rs. 44,000X4) 16. Compensation for NIL loss of love and MACT No. 746/18 Rita Devi & Ors. Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors. Page No. 43/50 MACT No. 744/18 Ram Lakhan Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors. Digitally signed by PANKAJ PANKAJ SHARMA SHARMA Date: 2023.12.08 12:57:33 +0530 affection (I) 17. Compensation for Rs. 20,000/- loss of estate(J) 18. Compensation Rs. 20,000/- towards funeral expenses(K) 19. TOTAL Rs.26,69,120/- COMPENSATION (F+G+H+I+J+K= L) 20. RATE OF 8% INTEREST AWARDED 21. Interest amount up Rs.11,03,237/- (rounded off) to the date of award(M) 22. Total amount Rs. 37,72,357/- including interest(L + M) MACT No. 746/18 Rita Devi & Ors. Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors. Page No. 44/50 MACT No. 744/18 Ram Lakhan Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors. Digitally signed by PANKAJ PANKAJ SHARMA SHARMA Date: 2023.12.08 12:57:37 +0530 23. Award amount P-1 : Rs.2,63,417/- released P-2 : Rs.37,485/- P-3 : Rs.37,485/- P-4 : Rs.37,485/- P-5 : Rs.37,485/- 24. Award amount kept As per award in FDRs 25. Mode of Mentioned in the award disbursement of the award amount to the petitioner (s) 26. Next date for 09.01.2024 compliance of the award MACT No. 746/18 Rita Devi & Ors. Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors. Page No. 45/50 MACT No. 744/18 Ram Lakhan Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors. Digitally signed by PANKAJ PANKAJ SHARMA SHARMA Date: 2023.12.08 12:57:41 +0530
FORM - XVI, Central Motor Vehicles (fifth Amendment) Rules, 2022 (Pl. see Rule 150A) SUMMARY OF THE COMPUTATION OF AWARD AMOUNT IN INJURY CASE
1. Date of accident : 28.07.2018
2. Name of the injured : Ram Lakhan
3. Age of the injured : 50 Years
4. Occupation of the injured : Running a shop
5. Income of the injured : Assessed on the basis of minimum wages payable to an unskilled Person in Delhi at the relevant time.
6. Nature of injury : Greivous
7. Medical treatment taken : LBRN Hospital & Baba Ortho.
8. Period of Hospitalization : NIL
9. Whether any permanent MACT No. 746/18 Rita Devi & Ors. Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors. Page No. 46/50 MACT No. 744/18 Ram Lakhan Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors. Digitally signed by PANKAJ PANKAJ SHARMA SHARMA Date:
2023.12.08 12:57:51 +0530 disability ? If yes, give details : Yes.
10. Computation of Compensation S. No. Heads Awarded by the Tribunal
11. Pecuniary Loss
(i) Expenditure on treatment Rs.9,446/-
(ii) Expenditure on conveyance Rs. 25,000/-
(iii) Expenditure on special diet Rs. 25,000/-
(iv) Cost of nursing/attendant Rs.25,000/-
(v) Cost of artificial limb NIL
(vi) Loss of earning capacity NIL
(vii) Loss of Income Rs. 83,376/-
MACT No. 746/18 Rita Devi & Ors. Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors. Page No. 47/50
MACT No. 744/18 Ram Lakhan Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors.
Digitally
signed by
PANKAJ
PANKAJ SHARMA
SHARMA Date:
2023.12.08
12:57:56
+0530
(viii) 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 NIL
and physical shock
(ii) Pain and suffering Rs. 25,000/-
(iii) Loss of amenities of life Rs. 25,000/-
(iv) Disfiguration Rs. 25,000/-
(v) Loss of marriage prospects NIL
(vi) Discomfort, Inconvenience NIL
and Loss of earnings to the
Parents during the period of
hospitalization
13. Disability resulting in loss of earning capacity:
MACT No. 746/18 Rita Devi & Ors. Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors. Page No. 48/50MACT No. 744/18 Ram Lakhan Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors. Digitally signed by PANKAJ PANKAJ SHARMA SHARMA Date:
2023.12.08 12:58:01 +0530 (I) Percentage of disability 35% w.r.t. right lower limb.
assessed and nature of disability as permanent or temporary
(ii) Loss of amenities or loss of N.A. expectation of life span on account of disability 25%
(iii) Percentage of loss of earning capacity in relation to disability
(iv) Loss of future income - Rs. 6,77,430/-
(Income x% Earning Capacity x Multiplier)
14. TOTAL COMPENSATION Rs.9,20,252/-
15. INTEREST AWARDED 8% per annum
16. Interest amount up to the Rs.3,80,371/-(rounded off) date of award
17. Total amount including Rs.13,00,623/-
interest MACT No. 746/18 Rita Devi & Ors. Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors. Page No. 49/50 MACT No. 744/18 Ram Lakhan Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors. Digitally signed by PANKAJ PANKAJ SHARMA SHARMA Date:
2023.12.08 12:58:05 +0530
18. Award amount released Rs.1,50,623/-
19. Award amount kept in Rs.11,50,000/-
FDRs
20. Mode of disbursement of Mentioned in the award the award amount to the petitioners(s).
21. Next date for compliance 09.01.2024 of the award.
CONCLUSION
1. As per award dated 08.12.2023.
2. A separate file was ordered to be prepared by the Nazir with directions to put up the same on 09.01.2024.
Digitally signed by PANKAJ PANKAJ SHARMA
SHARMA Date:
2023.12.08
12:58:11 +0530
(DR. PANKAJ SHARMA)
PO MACT-02 (CENTRAL)
DELHI/08.12.2023
MACT No. 746/18 Rita Devi & Ors. Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors. Page No. 50/50
MACT No. 744/18 Ram Lakhan Vs. Mukesh Kumar Singh & Ors.