Delhi District Court
Smt. Anita Rani Wd/O Sh. Jasbir Singh vs Sh. Usman Ali on 2 July, 2011
IN THE COURT OF SH. ARVIND KUMAR : PRESIDING OFFICER: MACT
KARKARDOOMA COURTS : DELHI
M.A.C. Petition No: 666/10
Unique Case ID No. : 02402C0711522008
1. Smt. Anita Rani Wd/o Sh. Jasbir Singh
2. Master Shubham Nain S/o Late Sh. Jasbir Singh
3. Sonal D/o Late Jasbir Singh
4. Sh. Ranbir Singh (Deleted since died on 18.04.2011)
5. Smt. Rajbala W/o Sh. Ranbir Singh
(petitioner no. 2 and 3 being minor through their mother and natural guardian/
petitioner no. 1)
All R/o House No. 1449/124,
Street No. 3, Durga Puri,
Shahdara, Delhi-110093 ... Petitioners
VERSUS
1. Sh. Usman Ali
S/o Sh. Islamuddin
R/o Village Kina Nagar
Meerut (U.P.)
Also At : C/o Sh. Subodh Goel
S/o Sh. Jaikishan Goel
R/o 208/2, West Jyoti Nagar,
Delhi
(Driver of truck no. HR-38K-4057)
2. Sh. Subhodh Goel
S/o Sh. Jaikishan Goel
R/o 208/2, West Jyoti Nagar, Delhi
Also At :
Village Pali, Distt. Faridabad
(Haryana)
(Regd. Owner of Truck No. HR-38K-4057)
3. National Insurance Co. Ltd.
RO-II, 2E/9, Jhandewalan Extension
New Delhi-110055
Issuing Office Code :361202
Bhagwan Mahavir Marg
Baraut-250611
Distt. Bhagpat (U.P)
Policy No. 361202/31/08/6300003469
M.A.C. Petition No: 666/10 Page No. 1/8
Valid from : 31.07.2008 to 30.07.2009
(Insurer of Truck No. HR-38K-4057)
.... Respondents
Presented on : 16.09.2008 Reserved for judgment on : 27.05.2011 Judgment delivered on : 02.07.2011 JUDG MENT
1. The petitioners have filed the present petition u/s 166 & 140 of MV Act 1988 claiming compensation of Rs. 25,00,000/- towards the death of one Sh. Jasbir Singh, in a road side accident, occurred on 13.08.2008.
2. The brief facts as stated by petitioners are that on 13.08.2008, one Sh.
Jasbir Singh had gone to meet one of his friend and while returning from Gulab Vatika when he reached near Loni Police Chowki, on Delhi -Saharanpur Road, a truck bearing no. HR-38K-4057, driven by respondent no. 1 at a high speed, rashly and negligently, hit Sh. Jasbir Singh. Sh. Jasbir Singh fell down and sustained grievous injuries. He was removed to GTB hospital on 14.08.2008 and succumbed to the injuries on 17.08.2008. An FIR was registered against the respondent no. 1. It is stated that the deceased was working as Production Superviser with Ragtron India, drawing a salary of Rs. 8500/- per month.
3. Respondent no. 1 and 2 filed written statement denying the involvement of the vehicle no. HR-38K-4057 in the accident.
4. Respondent no. 3/ insurance company filed written statement admitting that the vehicle no. HR-38K-4057 was insured in the name of Subhodh Goel vide policy no. 361202/31/08/6300003469, valid for the period 31.07.2008 to 30.07.2009.
5. On the basis of the pleadings following issues were framed:-
1. Whether Sh. Jasbir Singh sustained fatal injuries due to rash and negligent driving of Truck No. HR-38K-4057 by R-1? OPP M.A.C. Petition No: 666/10 Page No. 2/8
2. Whether the petitioner is entitled to get any compensation, if so, from whom and of what amount?
3. Relief.
6. Sh. Ranbir Singh, petitioner no. 4 examined himself as PW-1.
Petitioners also examined Sh. Ram Dhan Singh, Technical Assistant/ record clerk, UCMS and GTB hospital, Delhi as PW-2, Sh. Manjit Malik as PW-3 and Sh. Pawan Tyagi, Assistant Account in Ragtron India as PW-4. On the other hand, respondents did not lead any evidence.
7. I have heard counsels for the parties and gone through the material on record. My findings on issues are as under : -
ISSUE NO. 18. Sh. Ranbir Singh, father of the deceased examined himself as PW-1 and deposed that on 13.08.2008, one Sh. Jasbir Singh had gone to meet one of his friend and while returning from Gulab Vatika when he reached near Loni Police Chowki, on Delhi-Saharanpur Road, a truck bearing no. HR-38K-4057, driven by respondent no. 1 at a high speed, rashly and negligently, hit Sh. Jasbir Singh. Sh. Jasbir Singh fell down and sustained grievous injuries. He was removed to GTB hospital on 14.08.2008 and succumbed to the injuries on 17.08.2008. An FIR was registered against the respondent no. 1. It is stated that the deceased was working as Production Supervisor with Ragtron India drawing a salary of Rs. 8500/- per month.
9. The testimony of PW-3 Sh. Manjeet Malik is relevant on this issue. Sh.
Manjit Malik deposed that on 13.08.2008 he was coming from Loni Side and when he reached in front of Meenakshi Cinema Hall, a little ahead of Loni Police Chowki, a truck bearing no. HR-38K-4057 overtook his motorcycle and hit a pedestrian, who fell down and sustained injuries. The PW-3 Sh. Manjit Malik deposed that speed of truck was high and it was being driven rashly and negligently. The PW-3 stated that he went to Loni Police Chowki and informed to the police. Later on he came to know that injured had expired on 17.08.2009 M.A.C. Petition No: 666/10 Page No. 3/8 in GTB hospital. During cross-examination, Sh. Manjit Malik stated that truck came from Loni side and it was laden with bricks. The PW-2, Sh. Ram Dhan Singh, Technical Assistant /record clerk, UCMS and GTB hospital produced the postmortem report, Mark A.
10. The FIR, Site-plan, postmortem report and the testimony of the PW-1 Sh. Ranbir Singh and PW-3 Sh. Manjit Malik, taken together fully establish the death of the deceased caused by the injuries sustained by him involving vehicle bearing registration No. HR-38K-4057 in a road accident. There is nothing on record to dispel the inference that deceased Sh. Jasbir Singh, died on account of injuries sustained by him in a road accident which occurred on 13.08.2008 because of rash and negligent driving of vehicle bearing No. HR-38K-4057 being driven by its driver. There is no evidence in rebuttal. Issue no. 1 is accordingly decided in favour of petitioners and against the respondents.
ISSUE NO. 211. The PW-1 Sh. Ranveer Singh deposed that deceased was 36 years of age and was matriculate and he had also done certificate course in Electronics from ITI. PW-1, Sh. Ranveer Singh further stated that the deceased was working as a Production Supervisor with Sh. Amrish Tyagi, Proprietor of Ragtron India having office at KH-23/8, Plot No. B-4, Janta Enclave, Harsh Vihar, Mandoli, Delhi-110093 and was earning Rs. 8,500/- per month. The PW-4 Sh. Pawan Tyagi, Assistant, M/s Ragtron India exhibited the authorization letter as PW-4/A, payment vouchers as PW-4/B. He stated that he was maintaining the salary record of the employees and the payments were mostly made through cash and sometimes through cheques.
12. I have gone through the material on record. The PW-1, Sh. Ranveer Singh during cross-examination stated that deceased's salary was Rs. 8,000/- per month but the testimony of PW-4, Sh. Pawan Tyagi and documents on record clearly indicate that the deceased was earning Rs. 8,500/- per month. It M.A.C. Petition No: 666/10 Page No. 4/8 is apparent from the record that the income of deceased was Rs. 8,500/- per month however it has come on record that the deceased was employed with M/s Ragtron India ltd. on 04.01.2008 and had worked only for 7-8 months. There is no material on record to infer that the deceased was a permanent employee or was working against a permanent post therefore following the judgment "Smt. Sarla Verma & ors. vs DTC & Anr," passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court, no amount can be added in income toward future prospects. It has also come on record that the petitioner no. 4 has already expired
13. In the present case as noted above, the monthly salary of the deceased at the time of death was considered to be Rs. 8,500/- i.e. Rs. 1,02,000/- per annum (Rs. 8,500/- x 12). Interest of justice in the present case would be met if 1/4th i.e. Rs. 25,500/- is deducted (as there are 4 dependents after death of petitioner no. 4 Sh. Ranbir Singh) as the personal and living expenses of the deceased. After such deduction the contribution to the family (dependants) is determined as Rs. 76,500/- per annum. The multiplier applicable would be 15 having regard to the age of the deceased at the time of the death (as the deceased was 36 years of age). Therefore, the total loss on dependency would be Rs. 76,500 x 15 = Rs. 11,47,500/-.
14. In addition the claimants will be entitled to a sum of Rs. 10,000/- under the head of love and affection, Rs. 10,000/- loss of estate, Rs. 5,000/- towards funeral expenses and Rs. 10,000/- towards loss of consortium. Thus, the total compensation will be Rs. 11,82,500/-.
LIABILITY
15. Since Insurance company has admitted the policy as on date of accident therefore respondent no. 3, insurance company is liable to pay the compensation amount.
16. There being no evidence of violation of the policy condition and there being no evidence to support the permitted defence U/s. 149(2) of the M.V. Act, M.A.C. Petition No: 666/10 Page No. 5/8 I am unable to grant the recovery rights. Therefore, insurance company shall make good the compensation in terms of the accepted policy.
RELIEF
17. While granting the relief to petitioner, I am also to award the interest @ 7.5% p.a (except for the period not specifically allowed) on the above said amount of Rs. 11,82,500/- inclusive of interim compensation, from the date of filing of petition till realization of the amount.
18. In view of the above, I am directing the respondent no. 3, insurance company to pay to the claimants a sum of Rs. 11,82,500/- inclusive of interim compensation. The respondent No. 3/ insurance company is hereby directed to pay a compensation of Rs. 11,82,500/- inclusive of interim compensation, within one month to the petitioners. The respondent No. 3 shall also pay interest @ 7.5% p.a. (except for the period not specifically allowed) on the total compensation amount from the date of petition till realization to the petitioner.
For the aforesaid reasons, I pass the following award :-
AWARD
19. In view of the above the petition is allowed. The respondent No. 3 is liable to pay the compensation of Rs. 11,82,500/- inclusive of interim compensation. Hence, the respondent No. 3/insurance company is hereby directed to pay a compensation of Rs. 11,82,500/- within one month to the petitioners. The respondent No. 3 shall also pay interest @ 7.5% p.a. (except for the period not specifically allowed) on the total compensation amount from the date of petition till realization to the petitioners. The claimants are entitled to the compensation in the following proportions along with corresponding interest :-
(a) Petitioner No. 1 shall get Rs. 4,73,000/- along with corresponding interest.
(b) Petitioner No. 2 and 3 shall get Rs. 2,12,850/- each along with corresponding M.A.C. Petition No: 666/10 Page No. 6/8 interest.
(c) Petitioner no. 5 shall get Rs. 2,83,800/- along with corresponding interest.
20. The award amount along with interest be deposited by respondent No. 3 with UCO Bank, Nodal Officer through Nodal Officer, Karkardooma Branch, within 30 days in the petitioners' accounts.
21. Upon the aforesaid amount being deposited, the UCO Bank is directed to keep the amount awarded to petitioners in fixed deposit in the following manner:-
Petitioner no. 1 i. Fixed deposit of Rs. 1,00,000/- for a period of two year, four years and six years and rest of the amount shall be released to the petitioner no.1 with immediate effect by transferring the same to her saving bank account.
Petitioner no. 2 and 3 :-
i. The share of petitioner no. 2 and 3 shall be kept in FDR till they attaining majority.
Petitioner no. 5 :-
i. Fixed deposit of Rs. 50,000/- for a period of two year, four years and six years and rest of the amount shall be released to the petitioner no.5 with immediate effect by transferring the same to her saving bank account.
22. The interest on the aforesaid FDR shall be paid monthly by automatic credit of interest in the savings account of petitioners.
23. Withdrawal from the aforesaid account shall be permitted to the petitioner after due verification and the bank shall issue photo identity card of petitioner to facilitate identity.
24. No cheque book be issued to the petitioners without the permission of the court.
M.A.C. Petition No: 666/10 Page No. 7/825. The original fixed deposit receipts shall be retained by the bank in the safe custody. However, the original pass book shall be given to the appellant along with photocopy of the FDRs.
26. The original fixed deposit receipts shall be handed over to the petitioner on the expiry of the period of the FDRs.
27. No loan, advance or withdrawal shall be allowed on the said fixed deposit receipts without the permission of the court.
28. Half yearly statement of account be filed by the bank in the court.
29. On the request of the petitioner, the bank shall transfer the saving account to any other branch of UCO bank according to the convenience of the petitioners.
30. The petitioners shall furnish all the relevant documents for opening of the saving bank account and fixed deposit account to Nodal Officer, UCO Bank, Karkardooma Court, Delhi.
31. The compensation amount shall be deposited by respondent no. 3, within 30 days, in the court.
32. List for reporting compliance on 02.09.2011.
33. A copy of this order be given dasti to concerned parties.
ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN ( Arvind Kumar )
COURT ON 02.07.2011 Presiding Officer: MACT:
Karkardooma Court
Delhi
M.A.C. Petition No: 666/10 Page No. 8/8