Delhi District Court
Kuldeep vs . Deepak Shokeen & Ors. on 4 September, 2019
1
IN THE COURT OF SH. PARAMJIT SINGH PO : MACT (SOUTHWEST
DISTRICT), DWARKA COURTS: NEW DELHI
MACP No. : 401/16
Kuldeep Vs. Deepak Shokeen & Ors.
CNR No. DLSW010004202014
FIR No. 306/14
U/s 279/338 IPC
PS: Sector23, Dwarka
Kuldeep
S/o Sh. Ramesh Kumar
R/o Village Bamnoli,
PO : Dhul Siras,
Sector 28, Dwarka
New Delhi. ... Petitioner
Vs
1. Deepak Shokeen (Driver)
S/o Sh. Mahavir Singh
R/o H. No. 836, Ranghar Panna
Village Dichaun Kalan,
Najafgarh, Delhi
2. Mahavir Singh (Owner)
S/o Sh. Ganesh Lal
R/o H. No. 836, Ranghar Panna
Village Dichaun Kalan,
Najafgarh, Delhi
3 ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Ltd. (Insurer)
ICICI Lomabard House 414, Vir Savarkar Marg,
Near Siddhi Vinayak Temple,
Prabhadevi, Mumbai ... Respondents
MACP Nos. 401/16 &374/16 Kuldeep & Ramesh Vs. Deepak Shokeen & Ors. 1/33
2
MACP No. : 374/16
Ramesh Kumar Vs. Deepak Shokeen & Ors.
CNR No. DLSW010004102014
FIR No. 306/14
U/s 279/338 IPC
PS: Sector23, Dwarka
Ramesh Kumar
S/o Sh. Hari Krishan
R/o Village Bamnoli,
PO : Dhul Siras,
Sector 28, Dwarka
New Delhi. ... Petitioner
Vs
1. Deepak Shokeen (Driver)
S/o Sh. Mahavir Singh
R/o H. No. 836, Ranghar Panna
Village Dichaun Kalan,
Najafgarh, Delhi
2. Mahavir Singh (Owner)
S/o Sh. Ganesh Lal
R/o H. No. 836, Ranghar Panna
Village Dichaun Kalan,
Najafgarh, Delhi
3. ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Ltd. (Insurer)
ICICI Lomabard House 414, Vir Savarkar Marg,
Near Siddhi Vinayak Temple,
Prabhadevi, Mumbai ... Respondents
Date of institution of MACP No. 401/16 18.09.2014
Date of institution of MACP No. 374/16 18.09.2014
Date on which, judgment have been reserved07.08.2019
Date of pronouncement of judgment 04.09.2019
MACP Nos. 401/16 &374/16 Kuldeep & Ramesh Vs. Deepak Shokeen & Ors. 2/33
3
FORM V
COMPLIANCE OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE MODIFIED
CLAIMS TRIBUNAL AGREED PROCEDURE TO BE
MENTIONED IN THE AWARD
( In MACP No. 401/16 - Kuldeep Vs. Deepak Shokeen & Ors.)
1 Date of the accident 16.07.2014
2 Date of intimation of the accident by the Investigating Not clear from record
Officer to the Claims Tribunal ( Clause 2)
3 Date of intimation of the accident by the Investigating Not clear from record
Officer to the Insurance Company (Clause 2)
4 Date of filing of Report under Section 173 Cr. PC before Not clear from record
the Metropolitan Magistrate (Clause 10)
5 Date of filing of Detailed Accident Information Report 18.09.2014
(DAR) by the Investigating Officer before Claims
Tribunal. (Clause 10)
6 Date of service of DAR on the Insurance Company. 18.09.2014
(Clause 11)
7 Date of service of DAR on the claimant (s). (Clause 11) 18.09.2014
8 Whether DAR was complete in all respects? (Clause 16) Yes
9 If not, whether deficiencies in the DAR removed later on? N.A
10 Whether the police has verified the documents filed with Yes
DAR? (Clause 4)
11 Whether there was any delay or deficiency on the part of No
the Investigating Officer? If so, whether any action /
direction warranted?
12 Date of appointment of the Designated Officer by the Not clear from record
Insurance company ( Clause 20 )
13 Name, address and contact number of the Designated Not clear from record
Officer of the Insurance Company ( Clause 20 )
14 Whether the Designated Officer of the Insurance No
Company submitted his report within 30 days of the
DAR? ( Clause 22 )
15 Whether the Insurance Company admitted the liability? If No
so, whether the Designated Officer of the Insurance
Company fairly computed the compensation in accordance
with law ( Clause 23 )
MACP Nos. 401/16 &374/16 Kuldeep & Ramesh Vs. Deepak Shokeen & Ors. 3/33
4
16 Whether there was any delay or deficiency on the part of No
the Designated Officer of the Insurance Company? If so,
whether any action / directions warranted?
17 Date of response of the claimant (s) to the offer of the N.A
Insurance Company. ( Clause 24)
18 Date of Award 04.09.2019
19 Whether the award was passed with the consent of the No.
parties? ( Clause 22)
20 Whether the claimant (s) were directed to open savings
bank accounts (s) near their place of residence ? ( Clause Yes
18)
21 Date of order by which claimant(s) were directed to open 07.02.2018
savings bank accounts(s) near his place of residence and
produce PAN Card and Adhaar Card and the direction tot
he bank not issue any cheque book/debit card to the
claimants (s) and make an endorsement to this effect on
the passbook(s) (Clause 18 )
22 Date on which the claimant(s) produced the passbook of 25.04.2018
their savings bank account near the place of their
residence alongwith the endorsement, PAN Card and
Adhaar Card? (Clause 18 )
23 Permanent Residential Address of the Claimant(s) Village Bamnoli, PO : Dhul
(Clause 27 ) Siras, Sector 28, Dwarka New
Delhi
24. Details of savings bank account(s) of the claimant(s) and SB Account no. 65115924601
the address of the bank with IFSC Code( Clause 27) at SBI, Village Bamnoli,
New Delhi (IFSC No.
SBIN0050380).
25 Whether the claimant(s) savings bank account(s) is near Yes
his place of residence ? (Clause 27)
26 Whether the claimant(s) were examined at the time of Yes
passing of the award to ascertain his/their financial
condition? ( Clause 27)
27 Account number, MICR number, IFSC Code, name and Account No. 37665510911 at
branch of the bank of the Claims Tribunal in which the SBI, District Court Complex,
award amount is to be deposited/transferred. Sector10, Dwarka New Delhi,
(IFSC Code SBIN0011566 and
MICR Code 110002483)
MACP Nos. 401/16 &374/16 Kuldeep & Ramesh Vs. Deepak Shokeen & Ors. 4/33
5
FORM V
COMPLIANCE OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE MODIFIED
CLAIMS TRIBUNAL AGREED PROCEDURE TO BE
MENTIONED IN THE AWARD
( In MACP No. 374/16 - Ramesh Kumar Vs. Deepak Shokeen & Ors.)
1 Date of the accident 16.07.2014
2 Date of intimation of the accident by the Investigating Not clear from record
Officer to the Claims Tribunal ( Clause 2)
3 Date of intimation of the accident by the Investigating Not clear from record
Officer to the Insurance Company (Clause 2)
4 Date of filing of Report under Section 173 Cr. PC before Not clear from record
the Metropolitan Magistrate (Clause 10)
5 Date of filing of Detailed Accident Information Report 18.09.2014
(DAR) by the Investigating Officer before Claims
Tribunal. (Clause 10)
6 Date of service of DAR on the Insurance Company. 18.09.2014
(Clause 11)
7 Date of service of DAR on the claimant (s). (Clause 11) 18.09.2014
8 Whether DAR was complete in all respects? (Clause 16) Yes
9 If not, whether deficiencies in the DAR removed later on? N.A
10 Whether the police has verified the documents filed with Yes
DAR? (Clause 4)
11 Whether there was any delay or deficiency on the part of No
the Investigating Officer? If so, whether any action /
direction warranted?
12 Date of appointment of the Designated Officer by the Not clear from record
Insurance company ( Clause 20 )
13 Name, address and contact number of the Designated Not clear from record
Officer of the Insurance Company ( Clause 20 )
14 Whether the Designated Officer of the Insurance No
Company submitted his report within 30 days of the
DAR? ( Clause 22 )
15 Whether the Insurance Company admitted the liability? If No
so, whether the Designated Officer of the Insurance
Company fairly computed the compensation in accordance
with law ( Clause 23 )
MACP Nos. 401/16 &374/16 Kuldeep & Ramesh Vs. Deepak Shokeen & Ors. 5/33
6
16 Whether there was any delay or deficiency on the part of No
the Designated Officer of the Insurance Company? If so,
whether any action / directions warranted?
17 Date of response of the claimant (s) to the offer of the N.A
Insurance Company. ( Clause 24)
18 Date of Award 04.09.2019
19 Whether the award was passed with the consent of the No.
parties? ( Clause 22)
20 Whether the claimant (s) were directed to open savings
bank accounts (s) near their place of residence ? ( Clause Yes
18)
21 Date of order by which claimant(s) were directed to open 07.02.2018
savings bank accounts(s) near his place of residence and
produce PAN Card and Adhaar Card and the direction tot
he bank not issue any cheque book/debit card to the
claimants (s) and make an endorsement to this effect on
the passbook(s) (Clause 18 )
22 Date on which the claimant(s) produced the passbook of 25.04.2018
their savings bank account near the place of their
residence alongwith the endorsement, PAN Card and
Adhaar Card? (Clause 18 )
23 Permanent Residential Address of the Claimant(s) Village Bamnoli, PO : Dhul
(Clause 27 ) Siras, Sector 28, Dwarka
New Delhi
24. Details of savings bank account(s) of the claimant(s) and SB Account no. 55002627408
the address of the bank with IFSC Code( Clause 27) at SBI, Village Bamnoli,
New Delhi (IFSC No.
SBIN0050380).
25 Whether the claimant(s) savings bank account(s) is near Yes
his place of residence ? (Clause 27)
26 Whether the claimant(s) were examined at the time of Yes
passing of the award to ascertain his/their financial
condition? ( Clause 27)
27 Account number, MICR number, IFSC Code, name and Account No. 37665510911 at
branch of the bank of the Claims Tribunal in which the SBI, District Court Complex,
award amount is to be deposited/transferred. Sector10, Dwarka New Delhi,
(IFSC Code SBIN0011566 and
MICR Code 110002483)
MACP Nos. 401/16 &374/16 Kuldeep & Ramesh Vs. Deepak Shokeen & Ors. 6/33
7
JUDGMENT:
Vide this common judgment, I shall dispose of two cases/DAR bearing MACP No. 401/16 and MACP No.374/16 pertaining the same road traffic accident, which took place on 16.07.2014.
The first case/DAR (bearing MACP No. 401/16) has been filed qua the injuries caused to petitioner/ injured Kuldeep in a road traffic accident dated 16.07.2014.
The connected case/DAR (bearing MACP No. 374/16) has been filed qua the injuries sustained by petitioner/ injured Ramesh Kumar in the same road traffic accident.
2. Brief facts as made out from the abovesaid cases/DAR are that on 16.07.2014 at about 1:40 PM, petitioner Kuldeep alongwith his father namely Ramesh was coming from Pochanpur to his village Bamnoli on a motorcycle bearing no. DL 9SAE 8638 and when they reached crossing of Dwarka Link Road, suddenly the offending vehicle bearing no. DL 2CAS 5374 came from Chhawla side at a very high speed being driven in rash and negligent manner and hit the motorcycle as a result of which the petitioners Kuldeep and Ramesh Kumar fell down on the road and sustained injuries. It is stated that after the accident, petitioners/ injured were taken to Artemis hospital and the case in this regard was registered vide FIR No. 306/14 u/s 279/338 IPC at PS : Sector 23, Dwarka.
On conclusion of the investigation, the present DAR (bearing MACP No. 401/16) has been filed by the IO qua the injuries sustained by petitioner/ injured Kuldeep in the abovesaid accident. Further, the connected DAR (bearing MACP No. 374/16) has been filed by the IO in respect of the injuries sustained by petitioner / MACP Nos. 401/16 &374/16 Kuldeep & Ramesh Vs. Deepak Shokeen & Ors. 7/33 8 injuredRamesh Kumar in the same accident.
3. Reply have been filed on behalf of R1 Deepak Shokeen (driver) and R2 Mahavir Singh ( owner of offending vehicle ), wherein it has been stated that the offending vehicle / car has been falsely implicated in this case. It is further stated that the offending vehicle was insured with ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Ltd and the liability, if any, was of the said insurance company. It is stated that police officials have not investigated the present matter in proper manner and have falsely involved the vehicle of the respondents. It is also stated that respondents were not liable to pay any compensation and it has been prayed that the case of the petitioners/ injured may be dismissed with heavy cost.
4. In its reply, R3/ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Ltd. has stated that the offending vehicle bearing no. DL 2CAS 5374 was insured with the respondent/insurance company vide policy no. 3001/84444015/00/000 for the period from 31.10.2013 to 30.10.2014 in the name of Mahavir Singh and the liability of insurance company was subject to term and conditions of the insurance policy. It is also stated that offer of respondent/ insurance company may be taken on record and the DAR filed by the police may be disposed of.
5. Since, common question of law and facts were involved in both these cases/petition bearing MACP No.401/16 & MACP No. 374/16, the common issues were framed and the same were consolidated for the purpose of recording the evidence by treating the case bearing MACP No. 401/16 as "Leading Case".
MACP Nos. 401/16 &374/16 Kuldeep & Ramesh Vs. Deepak Shokeen & Ors. 8/33 9 ISSUES :
1. Whether Kuldeep and Ramesh Kumar sustained injuries in a motor accident on 16.07.2014 due to rash and negligent driving of vehicle no. DL 2CAS 5374, being driven by R1 Deepak, owned by R2 Mahavir Singh and insured by R3/ ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Ltd. ? ...OPP
2. Whether the petitioners are entitled to claim compensation, if so, what amount and from whom ? ...OPP
3. Relief.
6. In their PE, petitioners/ injured have examined PW1 Kuldeep (petitioner/injured in MACP No. 401/16) and thereafter, PE was closed on behalf of the said petitioners/ injured.
7. In the instant case, no RE has been led on behalf of respondents and on 18.11.2018, R1, Ld counsel for R3/Insurance Company stated that no RE was to be led in this case and accordingly, RE stands closed.
8. I have heard the arguments in both these cases/DAR (bearing MACP No.401/16 and MACP No.374/16) put forward by Ld. counsels for the petitioners and R3/ insurance company and have carefully gone through record of the case. I have carefully considered the evidence led by the petitioners in support of their case. I have also carefully perused written submissions filed on behalf of the petitioners and R3/ insurance company.
It is pertinent to mention here that the arguments have not been addressed in both the cases/DAR on behalf of R1 Deepak Shokeen (driver) and R2 MACP Nos. 401/16 &374/16 Kuldeep & Ramesh Vs. Deepak Shokeen & Ors. 9/33 10 Mahavir Singh (owner of the offending vehicle), despite opportunity being given.
9. The issuewise findings are as under :
10. ISSUE No. 1 in both the cases/DAR bearing MACP No.401/16 and MACP No. 374/16 Whether Kuldeep and Ramesh Kumar sustained injuries in a motor accident on 16.07.2014 due to rash and negligent driving of vehicle no. DL 2CAS 5374, being driven by R1 Deepak, owned by R2 Mahavir Singh and insured by R3/ ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Ltd. ? ...OPP The onus to prove the abovesaid issue no. 1 was upon the petitioners/ injured and in order to discharge the said onus, the petitioners/ injured Kuldeep has examined himself as PW1 and has filed his evidence by way of affidavit (Ex. PW1/A), wherein it has been stated that on 16.07.2014 at about 1:40 PM, he alongwith his father namely Ramesh was coming from Pochanpur to his village Bamnoli on a motorcycle bearing no. DL 9SAE 8638 and when they reached crossing of Dwarka Link Road, suddenly the offending vehicle bearing no. DL 2CAS 5374 came from Chhawla side at a very high speed being driven in rash and negligent manner and hit the motorcycle as a result of which he and his father Ramesh Kumar fell down on the road and sustained injuries. PW1 also deposed that after the accident, they were taken to Artemis hospital and the case in this regard was registered vide FIR No. 306/14 u/s 279/338 IPC at PS : Sector 23, Dwarka.
The important fact is that the abovesaid witness i.e. PW1 Kuldeep was cross examined on behalf respondents, but nothing material has come on record which could assail the credibility or trustworthiness of these witnesses.
In his cross examination by the Ld. counsel for R3/Insurance company, MACP Nos. 401/16 &374/16 Kuldeep & Ramesh Vs. Deepak Shokeen & Ors. 10/33 11 PW1 Kuldeep stated that at the time of accident, his father was driving the motorcycle and both of them were wearing helmets at that time. PW1 also denied the suggestion that his father was driving the aforesaid motorcycle in a rash and negligent manner or that accident took place due to the fault of his father. In these circumstances, nothing material has come on record which could shake the credibility of these witnesses qua their deposition regarding the manner in which the accident was caused in this case.
Hence, in view of the above discussion & observations and having regard to the fact and circumstances of the present case, it is evident that petitioners/ injured Kuldeep and Ramesh Kumar sustained injuries in motor vehicle accident dated 16.7.2014 due to rash and negligent driving of offending vehicle no. DL 2CAS 5374, which was being driven by R1/Deepak Shokeen, owned by R2 Mahavir Singh and insured with R3/ ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Ltd at the time of accident.
Accordingly, issue no.1 is decided in favour of the petitioners/ injured and against the respondents.
11. ISSUE No. 2Whether the petitioners are entitled to claim compensation, if so, what amount and from whom ? ...OPP The onus to prove the abovesaid issue no. 2 in MACP No. 401/16 was upon the petitioner/ injuredKuldeep and in order to discharge the said onus, petitioner/injuredKuldeep has examined himself as PW1 and has filed his evidence by way of affidavit (Ex. PW1/A), wherein it has been stated that he had received grievous injuries in the accident caused due to rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle bearing no. DL 2CAS 5374. PW1 further deposed that after MACP Nos. 401/16 &374/16 Kuldeep & Ramesh Vs. Deepak Shokeen & Ors. 11/33 12 the accident, he was taken to Artemis hospital , where he remained admitted from 16.07.2014 to 30.07.2014 and thereafter from 18.08.2014 to 19.08.2014. Later on, he also remained admitted in Sarvodya hospital, Gurgaon from 08.10.2014 to 13.10.2014. PW1 deposed that he had incurred expenses of Rs.4,81,700/ on his treatment, Rs.25,000/ on conveyance and Rs.35,000/ on special diet and he had also to hire an attendant for Rs.7,000/pm due to the accident. PW1 further deposed that at the time of accident, he was student of B. Com ( PartIII) and was working as parttime tutor and was having income of Rs.13,000/pm. PW1 has also relied upon the documents Ex. PW1/1 to Ex. PW1/5 (colly.).
Hence, in view of the above and in view of the material and evidence record, it is clear that petitioner/injuredKuldeep sustained injuries in motor vehicle accident dated 16.7.2014 due to rash and negligent driving of offending vehicle no. DL 2CAS 5374 which was being driven by R1 Deepak Shokeen, owned by R2 Mahavir Singh and insured with R3/ ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Ltd at the time of accident and as such, petitioner / injuredKuldeep has become entitled to claim compensation for the injuries caused to him in the abovesaid accident.
Quantum of compensation payable to the petitioner/injuredKuldeep (MACP No. 401/16) is ascertained under the following heads :
12. NATURE AND EXTENT OF INJURIES As per the medical treatment record/discharge summary pertaining to Artemis Hospital, Dwarka , New Delhi petitioner/ injuredKuldeep is a case of dislocation left shoulder with fracture BB right leg compound with left fibula with stricture urethra .
Further as per Disability Certificate No.F.1/DDU/MB/2016/7860 dated MACP Nos. 401/16 &374/16 Kuldeep & Ramesh Vs. Deepak Shokeen & Ors. 12/33 13 08.2.2016 issued by DDU Hospital, Hari Nagar, New Delhi the petitioner/ injured Kuldeep is a case of compound fracture both bones right leg with permanent disability of 16% in relation to right lower limb.
13. MEDICINES & TREATMENT In the present case, as per record, the petitioner/injured Kuldeep has undergone treatment at Artemis hospital, where he remained admitted from 16.07.2014 to 30.07.2014 and thereafter from 18.08.2014 to 19.08.2014. Later on, he also remained admitted in Sarvodya hospital, Gurgaon from 08.10.2014 to 13.10.2014.
Further, in regard to the abovesaid treatment undergone by him , petitioner/injured has placed on record the medical bills, Ex. PW1/5 ( colly.) amounting to Rs. 4,81,000/ There is no reason to doubt the said bills, Ex. PW1/5 (colly.). In these circumstances and in view of the material on record, the petitioner/injured shall be entitled to a sum of Rs. 4,81,000 / and accordingly , the petitioner/injuredKuldeep is awarded the said amount i.e Rs. 4,81,000/ (Rupees Four Lacs Eighty One Thousand Only) towards medicines and medical treatment.
14. CONVEYANCE & SPECIAL DIET In the present case, as per the medical treatment record, petitioner/ injured Kuldeep is a case of dislocation left shoulder with fracture BB right leg compound with left fibula with stricture urethra. In these circumstances, the petitioner/injured must have visited the hospital / doctors for his treatment and would also have required special diet for certain period to recover from the injuries sustained in the accident.
It is being submitted on behalf of the petitioner/injured that he has spent MACP Nos. 401/16 &374/16 Kuldeep & Ramesh Vs. Deepak Shokeen & Ors. 13/33 14 Rs. 25,000/ on conveyance and Rs. 35,000/ on special diet, however no evidence, documentary or otherwise, in this regard has been brought on record on behalf of the petitioner/injured. Further, it is pertinent to note that from the material on record, it is evident that the petitioner/injured has suffered 16% permanent disability in relation to right lower limb.
Hence, in view of the above and in view of the material on record, petitioner/injured shall be entitled to a sum of Rs. 15,000/ (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) towards conveyance. Further, in view of the injuries suffered by him, the petitioner/ injured must have needed special diet for a certain period to have a fast and proper recovery. In these circumstances and in view of the material on record, the petitioner/injured is also awarded Rs. 20,000/ (Rupees Twenty Thousand Only) towards expenses for special diet.
15. LOSS OF INCOME In the present case, the petitioner/injured stated that at the time of accident, he was student of B. Com ( PartIII) and was working as parttime tutor and was having income of Rs.13,000/pm., however, no documentary evidence in this regard has been placed on record and in the absence thereof, the minimum wages for matriculates during the relevant period (16.7.2014) i.e Rs.10,374/ p.m is taken as criteria for calculating the loss of income to the petitioner/injured.
In the instant case, petitioner/injured has suffered dislocation left shoulder with fracture BB right leg compound with left fibula with stricture urethra and has remained hospitalized for about twenty days . Further, in view of the material on record, it appears that it might have taken about six months for the petitioner/injured to recover from the said injuries sustained by him in the accident. In these circumstances and in view of the material on record, the petitioner is MACP Nos. 401/16 &374/16 Kuldeep & Ramesh Vs. Deepak Shokeen & Ors. 14/33 15 entitled to a sum of Rs. 10,374/ x 6= Rs. 62,244/ (Rupees Sixty Two Thousand Two Hundred Forty Four only) under the head ' Loss of Income'.
16. ATTENDANT CHARGES In the present case, the petitioner/injured has deposed that he has spent a sum of Rs. 42,000/ on attendant , however neither the said attendant have been examined nor the said payment made to him has been proved on record in accordance with law .
In the instant case, the perusal of the record reveals that petitioner / injured Kuldeep is a case of dislocation left shoulder with fracture BB right leg compound with left fibula with stricture urethra and he remained hospitalized for about two days due to the said injuries sustained by him in the accident. In these circumstances, the petitioner/ injured must have required the services of attendant for about six months. It is pertinent to note that the petitioner/injured would have also needed an attendant to look after him, even if the gratuitous services were rendered by the some or the other of this family members. In the case titled as "Delhi Transport Corporation and Anr. V. Lalita" (reported as AIR 1981 Delhi 558), it has been held by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi that a victim cannot be deprived of compensation towards gratuitous services rendered by some of the family members.
In these circumstances and in view of the material on record, the petitioner/injured shall be entitled to an amount of Rs. 4,000 X 6 = Rs. 24,000/ (Rupees Twenty Four Thousand Only) towards 'Attendant Charges'.
17. PAIN & SUFFERINGS As per the settled law, for assessing the pain & sufferings, the following factors have to be taken into account : MACP Nos. 401/16 &374/16 Kuldeep & Ramesh Vs. Deepak Shokeen & Ors. 15/33 16
(a) Nature of injury
(b) Parts of body where injuries occurred
(c) Surgeries, if any
(d) Confinement in hospital
(e) Duration of the treatment.
In the instant case, in view of the material/evidence on record, there is no element of doubt that the petitioner/injured has suffered dislocation left shoulder with fracture BB right leg compound with left fibula with stricture urethra and has remained hospitalized for about twenty days due to the said injuries sustained by him. In these circumstances and in view of the law laid down in the case titled as "Rekha Jain Vs. National Insurance Co. Ltd." (arising out of SLP (C) Nos. 564951 of 2012), the petitioner / injured is entitled to compensation on account of pain & suffering due to the accident. The pain and sufferings of petitioner/injured can not be adequately compensated in terms of money however, in view of the facts & circumstances of the present case and in view of the material on record, a sum of Rs. 70,000/ ( Rupees Seventy Thousand only) is awarded to the petitioner towards the head " pain & sufferings".
18. LOSS OF ENJOYMENT OF LIFE AND AMENITIES The petitioner/injured has claimed that he has suffered loss of the enjoyment of life and other amenities on account of the accident. The petitioner/ injured was about 20 years of age at the time of accident and has suffered dislocation left shoulder with fracture BB right leg compound with left fibula with stricture urethra and was hospitalized for about twenty days due to the said injuries sustained in the accident. In these circumstances and in view of the law laid down vide judgment of Rekha Jain (Supra), the petitioner/ injured shall be entitled to a MACP Nos. 401/16 &374/16 Kuldeep & Ramesh Vs. Deepak Shokeen & Ors. 16/33 17 sum of Rs. 50,000/ (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) as compensation towards loss of enjoyment of life and amenities. In addition to this, the petitioner / injured shall also be entitled to a sum of Rs. 30,000/ (Rupees Thirty Thousand only) as compensation for mental and physical shock suffered by him due to the accident in this case.
19. LOSS OF FUTURE INCOME/PROSPECTS In the present case as per medical record, petitioner/injuredKuldeep has suffered dislocation left shoulder with fracture BB right leg compound with left fibula with stricture urethra in the accident in this case and as per Disability Certificate dated 08.2.2016 (Ex. PW1/7) issued by DDU Hospital, Hari Nagar, New Delhi , the petitioner/ injured Kuldeep has suffered 16% permanent disability in relation to right lower limb.
Hence, in view of above and in view of the material on record, the functional disability of the petitioner/injured in the instant case can be taken as 8 % and qua the income of the petitioner/injured, this comes to about Rs. 830/ p.m . In the instant case, the petitioner/injured was about 20 years of age at the time of accident and hence, the multiplier of '18' is to be taken and therefore the loss of future income/prospects comes to Rs. 830/ x 12 x 18 = Rs 1,79,280/ .
Thus, in view of the above, the petitioner/injured Mani Sen Tiwari shall be entitled to a sum of Rs. 1,79,280/ ( Rupees One Lakh, Seventy Nine Thousand Two Hundred Eighty Only) as compensation under this head.
20. The breakup of compensation that has been awarded to the petitioner/ injuredKuldeep is tabulated as below : MACP Nos. 401/16 &374/16 Kuldeep & Ramesh Vs. Deepak Shokeen & Ors. 17/33 18 S.No. HEADS AMOUNT (in Rupees) 1 Medicines & Treatment Rs. 4,81,000/
2. Conveyance Rs. 15,000/
3. Special Diet Rs. 20,000/
4. Loss of Income Rs. 62,244/
5. Attendant Charges Rs. 24,000/
6. Pain & sufferings Rs. 70,000/
7. Loss of Enjoyment of Life and Amenities. Rs. 50,000/
8. Compensation for mental and physical shock Rs. 30,000/
9. Loss of future income /prospects Rs. 1,79,280/ Total Rs.9,31,524/ rounded of to Rs. 9,32,000/
21. INTEREST In the instant case, there is nothing on record, which could justify the withholding of interest on the award amount. In these circumstances and having regard to the fact and circumstances of the present case, it will be just and proper to award interest @ 9% per annum on the award amount in this case. Hence, the petitioner/injured is awarded interest @ 9% per annum on the abovesaid compensation/ award amount i.e Rs. 9,32,000/ from the date of filing of petition i.e. 18.9.2014 till realization.
22. RELIEF IN MACP No. 401/16 (Kuldeep Vs. Deepak Shokeen & Ors.) Thus in view of the above discussion & observations and having regard to the fact and circumstances of the present case, an award for a sum of Rs.9,32,000 / (Rupees Nine Lacs, Thirty Two Thousand only) alongwith interest @ MACP Nos. 401/16 &374/16 Kuldeep & Ramesh Vs. Deepak Shokeen & Ors. 18/33 19 9% p.a from the date of filing of the petition i.e 18.9.2014 till realization is passed in favour of the petitioner/injured-Kuldeep and against the respondents.
23. FORMIVB SUMMARY OF THE COMPUTATION OF AWARD AMOUNT IN INJURY CASES TO BE INCORPORATED IN THE AWARD
i) Date of accident : 16.7.2014
ii). Name of the injured : Kuldeep
iii). Age of the injured : 20 years ( at the time of accident)
iv). Occupation of the injured : Private Work (at the time of accident)
v). Income of the injured : Rs. 10,374/ p.m
vi). Nature of injury : Grievous
vii). Medical treatment taken : Artemis Hospital, New Delhi & Sarvodya by the injured Hospital, Gurgaon
viii). Period of hospitalization : About twenty days
ix). Whether any permanent : 16% in relation to right lower limb disability?If yes, give details
10. Computation of Compensation S. No. Heads Awarded by the Tribunal
11. Pecuniary Loss:
(i) Expenditure on treatment Rs. 4,81,000/
(ii) Expenditure on conveyance Rs. 15,000/
(iii) Expenditure on special diet Rs. 20,000/
(iv) Cost of attendant/physiotherapist Rs. 24,000/
(v) Loss of earning capacity
(vi) Loss of income Rs. 62,244/
(vii) Any other loss which may require any
special treatment or aid to the injured for
MACP Nos. 401/16 &374/16 Kuldeep & Ramesh Vs. Deepak Shokeen & Ors. 19/33
20
the rest of his life
12. Non Pecuniary Loss:
(i) Compensation for mental and physical Rs. 30,000/
shock
(ii) Pain and suffering Rs. 70,000/
(iii) Loss of amenities of life Rs. 50,000/
(iv) Disfiguration
(v) Loss of marriage prospects
(vi) Loss of earning, 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 assessed and nature 16% in relation to right lower of disability as permanent or temporary limb
(ii) Loss of amenities or loss of expectation of life span on account of disability
(iii) Percentage of loss of earning capacity in 8% relation to disability
(iv) Loss of future income(Income x % Rs. 1,79,280/ Earning Capacity x Multiplier)
14. Total Compensation Rs.9,31,524/ rounded of to Rs. 9,32,000/
15. INTEREST AWARDED
16. Interest amount up to the date of award @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of petition i.e. 18.9.2014 till realization.
17. Total amount including interest Rs. 9,32,000/ + interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the petition i.e. 18.9.2014 till realization.
18. Award amount released As per table given below
19. Award amount kept in FDRs As per table given below MACP Nos. 401/16 &374/16 Kuldeep & Ramesh Vs. Deepak Shokeen & Ors. 20/33 21
20. Mode of disbursement of the award By credit in the SB Account of amount to the claimant(s) (Clause29) the petitioner/injured. 21 Next Date for compliance of the award. 09.10.2019 ( Clause 31)
24. Further, the statement of petitioner/injuredKuldeep regarding his financial status, needs and liabilities have also been recorded in this case . In view of the said statement of the petitioner/injured and having regard to facts and circumstances of the present case, the award amount shall be distributed as follows: S.No. Name Status Amount of Award Release Amount Amount /Period of FDR
1. Kuldeep Injured Rs. 9,32,000/ Rs. 92,000/ Rs. 8.4 lacs be kept in 84 FDRs of Rs. 10,000/ each for the period from one month to 84 months in the name of petitioner/ injured with cumulative interest.
The abovesaid award amount shall be disbursed through Motor Accident Claims Annuity Deposit Scheme (MACAD Scheme) formulated vide Orders dated 01.5.2018 and 07.12.2018 passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in FAO No. 842/2013 ( Rajesh Tyagi & Ors. Vs. Jaibir Singh & Ors.).
25. The onus to prove this issue no.2 in MACP No. 374/16 was upon the petitioner/injuredRamesh Kumar and in order to discharge the said onus, the said petitioner/ injuredRamesh Kumar has not led any evidence, however in view of the material on record, it is evident that petitioner/injured Ramesh Kumar has MACP Nos. 401/16 &374/16 Kuldeep & Ramesh Vs. Deepak Shokeen & Ors. 21/33 22 sustained injuries on account of rash and negligent driving of offending vehicle no. DL 2CAS 5374 which was being driven by R1 Deepak Shokeen, owned by R2 Mahavir Singh and insured with R3/ ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Ltd at the time of accident and as such, petitioner / injuredRamesh Kumar has become entitled to claim compensation for the injuries caused to him in the above said accident.
Quantum of compensation payable to the petitioner/injured Ramesh Kumar (MACP No. 374/16) is ascertained under the following heads :
26. NATURE AND EXTENT OF INJURIES As per the medical treatment record pertaining to Artemis Hospital, New Delhi, petitioner/injured Ramesh Kumar has sustained grievous injuries in the accident in the instant case.
Further the perusal of the record reveals that petitioner/injured has not filed on record any document to show that he has suffered any permanent disability due to the injuries sustained by him in the accident in this case.
27. MEDICINES & TREATMENT In the present case, as per record, the petitioner/injured Ramesh Kumar has undergone treatment at Artemis Hospital , Delhi for the injuries sustained by him in the accident in this case .
In the instant case, the perusal of the record reveals that petitioner/ injured Ramesh Kumar has received his entire treatment from the Artemis Hospital and no medical bills qua expenses incurred by him on his treatment or medicines, have been placed on record. In these circumstances, the petitioner/injured Ramesh Kumar shall not be entitled to any compensation under this head in this case.
MACP Nos. 401/16 &374/16 Kuldeep & Ramesh Vs. Deepak Shokeen & Ors. 22/33 23
28. CONVEYANCE & SPECIAL DIET In the present case, as per the medical treatment record, petitioner/ injured Ramesh Kumar has sustained grievous injuries in the accident in the instant case. In these circumstances, the petitioner/injured must have visited the hospital/ doctors for his treatment and would also have required special diet for certain period to recover from the injuries sustained in the accident, however no evidence in this regard has been lead on behalf of petitioner/injured in this case. Further, it is pertinent to note that from the material on record, it is evident that the petitioner/ injured has not suffered any permanent disability due to the injuries sustained in the accident in this case.
Hence, in view of the above and in view of the material on record, petitioner/injured shall be entitled to a sum of Rs. 5,000/ ( Rupees Five Thousand only) towards conveyance. Further, in view of the injuries suffered by him, the petitioner/ injured must have needed special diet for a certain period to have a fast and proper recovery. In these circumstances and in view of the material on record, the petitioner/injured is also awarded Rs. 10,000/ (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) towards expenses for special diet.
29. LOSS OF INCOME In the present case, the petitioner/injuredRamesh Kumar has not placed on record any evidence, documentary or otherwise, regarding his employment or income at the time of accident and in absence thereof, petitioner/injured Ramesh Kumar shall not be entitled to any compensation under this head in the instant case.
30. ATTENDANT CHARGES In the instant case, the perusal of the record reveals that petitioner/ MACP Nos. 401/16 &374/16 Kuldeep & Ramesh Vs. Deepak Shokeen & Ors. 23/33 24 injured Ramesh Kumar has not led any evidence qua expenses incurred by him on attendant. In these circumstances, the petitioner/injured Ramesh Kumar shall not be entitled to any compensation under this head in this case.
31. PAIN & SUFFERINGS As per the settled law, for assessing the pain & sufferings, the following factors have to be taken into account :
(a) Nature of injury
(b) Parts of body where injuries occurred
(c) Surgeries, if any
(d) Confinement in hospital
(e) Duration of the treatment.
In the instant case, in view of the material/evidence on record, there is no element of doubt that the petitioner/injured has has sustained grievous injuries in the accident in the instant case and has remained hospitalized for about one day due to the said injuries sustained by him. In these circumstances and in view of the law laid down in the case titled as "Rekha Jain Vs. National Insurance Co. Ltd." (arising out of SLP (C) Nos. 564951 of 2012), the petitioner/injured is entitled to compensation on account of pain & suffering due to the accident. The pain and sufferings of petitioner/injured can not be adequately compensated in terms of money however, in view of the facts & circumstances of the present case and in view of the material on record, a sum of Rs.40,000/ ( Rupees Forty Thousand only) is awarded to the petitioner towards the head " pain & sufferings".
32. LOSS OF ENJOYMENT OF LIFE AND AMENITIES The petitioner/injured has claimed that he has suffered the enjoyment of life and other amenities on account of the accident. The petitioner/injured was about MACP Nos. 401/16 &374/16 Kuldeep & Ramesh Vs. Deepak Shokeen & Ors. 24/33 25 60 years of age at the time of accident and has has sustained grievous injuries in the accident in the instant case and was hospitalized for about one day due to the said injuries sustained in the accident. In these circumstances and in view of the law laid down vide judgment of Rekha Jain (Supra), the petitioner/injured shall be entitled to a sum of Rs. 20,000/ (Rupees Twenty Thousand only) as compensation towards loss of enjoyment of life and amenities. In addition to this, the petitioner/ injured shall also be entitled to a sum of Rs. 10,000/ (Rupees Ten Thousand only) as compensation for mental and physical shock suffered by him due to the accident in this case.
33. The breakup of compensation that has been awarded to the petitioner/ injured Prince is tabulated as below : S.No. HEADS AMOUNT (in Rupees) 1 Medicines & Treatment
2. Conveyance Rs. 5,000/
3. Special Diet Rs. 10,000/
4. Loss of Income
5. Attendant
6. Pain & Sufferings Rs. 40,000/
7. Loss of Enjoyment of Life and Amenities Rs. 20,000/
8. Compensation for mental and physical shock Rs. 10,000/ Total Rs. 85,000/
34. INTEREST In the instant case, there is nothing on record, which could justify the withholding of interest on the award amount. In these circumstances and having MACP Nos. 401/16 &374/16 Kuldeep & Ramesh Vs. Deepak Shokeen & Ors. 25/33 26 regard to the fact and circumstances of the present case, it will be just and proper to award interest @ 9% per annum on the award amount in this case. Hence, the petitioner/injured is awarded interest @ 9% per annum on the abovesaid compensation/ award amount i.e Rs. 85,000/ from the date of filing of petition i.e. 18.9.2014 till realization.
35. RELIEFIN MACP No. 374/16 ( Ramesh Kumar Vs. Deepak Shokeen & Ors.) Thus in view of the above discussion & observations and having regard to the fact and circumstances of the present case, an award for a sum of Rs.85,000/ (Rupees Eighty Five Thousand only) alongwith interest @ 9% p.a from the date of filing of the petition i.e 18.9.2014 till realization is passed in favour of the petitioner/ injured-Ramesh Kumar and against the respondents .
36. FORMIVB SUMMARY OF THE COMPUTATION OF AWARD AMOUNT IN INJURY CASES TO BE INCORPORATED IN THE AWARD
i) Date of accident : 16.7..2014
ii). Name of the injured : Ramesh Kumar
iii). Age of the injured : 60 years ( at the time of accident)
iv). Occupation of the injured : Private work (at the time of accident)
v). Income of the injured :
vi). Nature of injury : Grievous
vii). Medical treatment taken : Artemis Hospital by the injured MACP Nos. 401/16 &374/16 Kuldeep & Ramesh Vs. Deepak Shokeen & Ors. 26/33 27
viii). Period of hospitalization : About one day
ix). Whether any permanent : No disability?If yes, give details
10. Computation of Compensation S. No. Heads Awarded by the Tribunal
11. Pecuniary Loss:
(i) Expenditure on treatment
(ii) Expenditure on conveyance Rs. 5,000/
(iii) Expenditure on special diet Rs. 10,000/
(iv) Cost of attendant
(v) Loss of earning capacity
(vi) Loss of income
(vii) Any other loss which may require any
special treatment or aid to the injured for
the rest of his life
12. Non Pecuniary Loss:
(i) Compensation for mental and physical Rs. 10,000/
shock
(ii) Pain and suffering Rs. 40,000/
(iii) Loss of amenities of life Rs. 20,000/
(iv) Disfiguration
(v) Loss of marriage prospects
(vi) Loss of earning, 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 assessed and nature N.A of disability as permanent or temporary
(ii) Loss of amenities or loss of expectation of life span on account of disability
(iii) Percentage of loss of earning capacity in relation to disability MACP Nos. 401/16 &374/16 Kuldeep & Ramesh Vs. Deepak Shokeen & Ors. 27/33 28
(iv) Loss of future income(Income x % Earning Capacity x Multiplier)
14. Total Compensation Rs.85,000/
15. INTEREST AWARDED
16. Interest amount up to the date of award @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of petition i.e. 18.9.2014 till realization.
17. Total amount including interest Rs. 85,000/ + interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the petition i.e. 18.9.2014 till realization.
18. Award amount released As per table given below
19. Award amount kept in FDRs As per table given below
20. Mode of disbursement of the award By credit in the SB Account of amount to the claimant(s) (Clause29) the petitioner/injured. 21 Next Date for compliance of the award. 09.10.2019 ( Clause 31)
37. Further, the statement of petitioner/injuredRamesh Kumar regarding his financial status, needs and liabilities have also been recorded in this case . In view of the said statement of the petitioner/injured and having regard to facts and circumstances of the present case , the award amount shall be distributed as follows: S.No. Name Status Amount of Award Release Amount Amount /Period of FDR
1. Ramesh Injured Rs. 85,000/ Rs. 5,000/ Rs. 80,000/ be kept in 20 Kumar FDRs of Rs. 4,000/ each for the period from one month to 20 months in the name of petitioner/ injured with cumulative interest.
MACP Nos. 401/16 &374/16 Kuldeep & Ramesh Vs. Deepak Shokeen & Ors. 28/33 29 The abovesaid award amount shall be disbursed through Motor Accident Claims Annuity Deposit Scheme (MACAD Scheme) formulated vide orders dated 01.5.2018 and 07.12.2018 passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in FAO No. 842/2013 ( Rajesh Tyagi & Ors. Vs. Jaibir Singh & Ors.).
38. LIABILITY ( In both these cases bearing MACP No. 401/16 & MACP No. 374/16) The offending vehicle bearing registration no. DL 2CAS 5374 was being driven by respondent no.1Deepak Shokeen , owned by respondent no.2 Mahavir Singh and was insured with respondent no.3/ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Ltd at the time of accident and as such, respondent no. 3/ ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Ltd being the 'principal tort feasor', shall be liable to pay the awarded amount to the petitioners in all these cases .
Hence, in view of the above, Issue No. 2 is decided accordingly.
39. In both these cases bearing MACP No. 401/16 & MACP No. 374/16 , the award amounts shall be deposited / transferred by respondent no. 3/ ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Ltd in the Account No. 37665510911 of 'MACT (SouthWest), Dwarka Courts, New Delhi ' at State Bank of India, District Court Complex, Sector10, Dwarka New Delhi (IFSC Code SBIN0011566 and MICR Code 110002483) by RTGS/NEFT/IMPS under intimation, with proof of notice to the claimant/petitioners and their counsel, to the Nazir of this court .
40. PetitionerKuldeep (petitioner/injured in MACP No. 401/16) has produced the passbook of his SB Account No. 65115924601 at SBI, Village Bamnoli , New Delhi (IFSC Code No. SBIN0050380), wherein it has been endorsed MACP Nos. 401/16 &374/16 Kuldeep & Ramesh Vs. Deepak Shokeen & Ors. 29/33 30 that " Cheque & ATM not issued ".
It is being requested on behalf of the petitioner/injured Kuldeep that the abovesaid cash amount may be transferred to his aforesaid SB Account at SBI, Village Bamnoli , New Delhi .
Accordingly, the Manager, State Bank of India, District Courts Complex, Sector10, Dwarka, New Delhi is directed to transfer the abovesaid cash amount to the abovesaid SB Account No. 65115924601 of petitioner/injured Kuldeep at SBI, Village Bamnoli , New Delhi and to keep the remaining amount in the form of above mentioned FDRs in terms of Motor Accident Claims Annuity Deposit Scheme (MACAD Scheme) formulated vide Orders dated 01.5.2018 and 07.12.2018 passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in FAO No. 842/2013 ( Rajesh Tyagi & Ors. Vs. Jaibir Singh & Ors.).
Manager, SBI, Village Bamnoli , New Delhi is directed to release the abovesaid cash amount to petitioner/injured Kuldeep , as per rules, as prayed.
At the time of maturity, the fixed deposit amount shall be credited in the aforesaid savings bank account of petitioner/injured.
All the original FDRs shall be retained by the concerned bank, however, the statement containing FDR number, amount, date of maturity and maturity amount shall be provided to petitioner/injured Kuldeep .
Manager of the concerned bank is directed not to permit premature encashment or loan qua the abovesaid FDRs to the petitioner/injured Kuldeep without the prior permission of this court.
The abovesaid SBI, Village Bamnoli , New Delhi is also directed not to issue any cheque book and/or debit card to the petitioner/ injured Kuldeep and if the same have already been issued, the said bank is directed to cancel the same and make an endorsement on the pass book that no cheque book or debit card shall be MACP Nos. 401/16 &374/16 Kuldeep & Ramesh Vs. Deepak Shokeen & Ors. 30/33 31 issued to petitioner/injured Kuldeep .
SBI, Village Bamnoli , New Delhi shall permit account holder i.e petitioner/injured Kuldeep to withdraw money from his abovesaid saving bank account by means of a withdrawal form .
41. Further, petitioner Ramesh Kumar (petitioner/injured in MACP No. 374/16) has produced the passbook of his SB Account No. 55002627408 at SBI, Village Bamnoli , New Delhi (IFSC Code No. SBIN0050380), wherein it has been endorsed that " Cheque & ATM not issued ".
It is being requested on behalf of the petitioner/injured Ramesh Kumar that the abovesaid cash amount may be transferred to his aforesaid SB Account at SBI, Village Bamnoli , New Delhi .
Accordingly, the Manager, State Bank of India, District Courts Complex, Sector10, Dwarka, New Delhi is directed to transfer the abovesaid cash amount to the abovesaid SB Account No. 55002627408 of petitioner/injured Ramesh Kumar at SBI, Village Bamnoli , New Delhi and to keep the remaining amount in the form of above mentioned FDRs in terms of Motor Accident Claims Annuity Deposit Scheme (MACAD Scheme) formulated vide Orders dated 01.5.2018 and 07.12.2018 passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in FAO No. 842/2013 ( Rajesh Tyagi & Ors. Vs. Jaibir Singh & Ors.).
Manager, SBI, Village Bamnoli , New Delhi is directed to release the abovesaid cash amount to petitioner/injured Ramesh Kumar , as per rules, as prayed.
At the time of maturity, the fixed deposit amount shall be credited in the aforesaid savings bank account of petitioner/injured.
All the original FDRs shall be retained by the concerned bank, however, MACP Nos. 401/16 &374/16 Kuldeep & Ramesh Vs. Deepak Shokeen & Ors. 31/33 32 the statement containing FDR number, amount, date of maturity and maturity amount shall be provided to petitioner/injured Ramesh Kumar .
Manager of the concerned bank is directed not to permit premature encashment or loan qua the abovesaid FDRs to the petitioner/injured Ramesh Kumar without the prior permission of this court.
The abovesaid SBI, Village Bamnoli , New Delhi is also directed not to issue any cheque book and/or debit card to the petitioner/ injured Ramesh Kumar and if the same have already been issued, the said bank is directed to cancel the same and make an endorsement on the pass book that no cheque book or debit card shall be issued to petitioner/injured Ramesh Kumar .
SBI, Village Bamnoli , New Delhi shall permit account holder i.e petitioner/injured Ramesh Kumar to withdraw money from his abovesaid saving bank account by means of a withdrawal form .
42. The insurance company shall inform the petitioners as well as their counsels through registered post that the award amount is being transferred/ deposited so as to facilitate the petitioners/injured to know about the deposit in the account.
Certified copy of this award be sent to the concerned Manager, SBI, District Courts Complex, Sector10, Dwarka, New Delhi and Manager, SBI, Village Bamnoli , New Delhi, for information / compliance.
Copy of this award be also sent through e.mail to Sh.Rajan Singh, Assistant General Manager ( Nodal Officer), State Bank of India at his email ID :
[email protected] in terms of Order dated 07.12.2018 passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in FAO No. 842/2003.
Certified copy of this award be given ''Dasti' to the petitioners/ their MACP Nos. 401/16 &374/16 Kuldeep & Ramesh Vs. Deepak Shokeen & Ors. 32/33 33 counsel and Ld. Counsel for the respondent/insurance company.
Certified copy of this award be also sent to the concerned Ld. Metropolitan Magistrate and Delhi State Legal Services Authority.
The main judgment be placed in the file pertaining to the leading/ main case bearing MACP No. 401/16 and the copy thereof be placed in the file of connected case bearing MACP No. 374/16 .
Ahlmad is directed to prepare separate misc. files and put up the same for filing of the compliance report on 09.10.2019.
File be consigned to the record room.
(Announced in the open (Paramjit Singh)
Court on 04.9.2019) PO, MACT (SouthWest District)
Dwarka Courts, New Delhi
04.9.2019
Digitally
signed by
PARAMJIT
PARAMJIT SINGH
SINGH Date:
2019.09.04
16:07:01
+0530
MACP Nos. 401/16 &374/16 Kuldeep & Ramesh Vs. Deepak Shokeen & Ors. 33/33