Delhi District Court
Manoj vs Ajay Kumar on 29 May, 2025
IN THE COURT OF SHRI TARUN YOGESH
LD. PO-MACT-01, SOUTH-WEST DISTRICT,
DWARKA COURTS, NEW DELHI
MACT No. 70/2021
CNR No. DLSW01-000700/2021
FIR No. 106/2020
PS: Dwarka South
In the matter of :
1) Sh. Manoj
S/o Sh. Ram Naresh.
R/o A-731, Mahavir Enclave-2,
Gali No. 19, Delhi-59. ... (Petitioner)
Versus
1) Sh. Ajay Kumar
S/o Sh. Ami Lal
R/o RZ-A-6, Jeewan Park,
Uttam Nagar, New Delhi. ... (Driver)
2) Sh. Mohit Sharma
S/o Sh. Madan Pal Sharma
R/o E54, Nanhe Park,
Uttam Nagar, Delhi-59. ...(Owner)
3) The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.
.... (Insurance company)
... Respondents
Date of Institution : 21.01.2021
Date of judgment : 29.05.2025
FORM - V
COMPLIANCE OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE
MODIFIED CLAIMS TRIBUNAL AGREED PROCEDURE
TO BE MENTIONED IN THE AWARD
MACT No. 70/2021 Manoj Vs. Ajay Kumar & Ors. Page 1 of 25
1. Date of the accident 18.03.2020
2. Date of intimation of the accident by the Not Available
investigating officer to the Claims Tribunal
(Clause 2)
3. Date of intimation of the accident by the Not Available
investigating officer to the insurance company.
(Clause 2)
4. Date of filing of Report under section 173 Not Available
Cr.P.C. before the Metropolitan Magistrate
(Clause 10)
5. Date of filing of Detailed Accident Information 21.01.2021
Report (DAR) by the investigating Officer
before Claims Tribunal (Clause 10)
6. Date of Service of DAR on the Insurance 21.01.2021
Company (Clause 11)
7. Date of service of DAR on the claimant(s). 21.01.2021
(Clause 11)
8. Whether DAR was complete in all respects? Yes
(Clause 16)
9. If not, whether deficiencies in the DAR removed N/A
later on?
10. Whether the police has verified the documents Yes
filed with DAR? (Clause 4)
11. Whether there was any delay or deficiency on Yes
the part of the Investigating Officer? If so,
whether any action/direction warranted?
12. Date of appointment of the Designated Officer N/A
by the insurance Company (Clause 20)
13. Name, address and contact number of the N/A
Designated Officer of the Insurance Company.
(Clause 20)
14. Whether the designated Officer of the Insurance Not Available
Company submitted his report within 30 days of
the DAR? (Clause 20)
15. Whether the insurance company admitted the Not Available
liability? If so, whether the Designated Officer
of the insurance company fairly computed the
MACT No. 70/2021 Manoj Vs. Ajay Kumar & Ors. Page 2 of 25
compensation in accordance with law. (Clause
23)
16. Whether there was any delay or deficiency on N/A
the part of the Designated Officer of the
Insurance Company? If so, whether any
action/direction warranted?
17. Date of response of the claimant (s) to the offer No
of the Insurance Company. (Clause 24)
18. Date of the Award 29.05.2025
19. Whether the award was passed with the consent No
of the parties? (Clause 22)
20. Whether the claimant(s) were directed to open Yes
saving bank account(s) near their place of
residence? (Clause 18)
21. Date of order by which claimant(s) were 21.01.2021
directed to open saving bank account (s) near his
place of residence and produce PAN Card and
Aadhar Card and the direction to the bank not
issue any cheque book/debit card to the
claimant(s) and make an endorsement to this
effect on the passbook(s). (Clause 18)
22. Date on which the claimant (s) produced the 20.01.2025
passbook of their saving bank account near the
place of their residence along with the
endorsement, PAN Card and Aadhar Card?
(Clause 18)
23. Permanent Residential Address of the A-731,
Claimant(s) (Clause 27) Mahavir
Enclave-2,
Gali No. 19,
Delhi-59
24. Details of saving bank account(s) of the S.B. Account
claimant(s) and the address of the bank with No.
IFSC Code (Clause 27) 43691826428
at SBI
Dwarka,
Sector-10,
Dwarka
Courts
Complex,
MACT No. 70/2021 Manoj Vs. Ajay Kumar & Ors. Page 3 of 25
Dwarka,
New Delhi
(IFSC Code:
SBIN001156
6)
25. Whether the claimant(s) saving bank account(s) Yes
is near his/her place of residence? (Clause 27)
26. Whether the claimant(s) were examined at the Yes
time of passing of the award to ascertain
his/their financial condition? (Clause 27)
27. Account number, MICR number IFSC Code, Account No.
name and branch of the bank of the Claims 42709452600
Tribunal in which the award amount is to be at SBI
deposited/transferred. Dwarka,
Sector-10,
Dwarka
Courts
Complex,
IFSC Code:
SBIN001156
6 & MICR
No.
110002483.
AWAR D
Preface
1. Detailed Accident Reports (DAR) seeking compensation
for bodily injury suffered by (i) Pankaj Kumari Yadav; (ii) Tilak
Mahto; (iii) Manoj; (iv) Tej Bahadur AND (v) Sandeep in motor
vehicle accident being subject matter of FIR No.106/2020 PS
Dwarka South are taken up together to be decided
simultaneously.
Background
2. As gleaned from Final Report under section 279/337/338/304A IPC, Smt. Pankaj Kumari Yadav standing at the Divider of the Main Road in front of Air Force & Naval Officers Enclave, Sector-7, Dwarka, New Delhi suffered bodily MACT No. 70/2021 Manoj Vs. Ajay Kumar & Ors. Page 4 of 25 injury in motor vehicle accident on 18.03.2020 at about 9:45 am after RTV No.DL-1VC-0344 driven at high speed in zig-zag manner hit the Divider while trying to overtake DTC Bus and 'Overturned' resulting in bodily injury to its occupants who were admitted in different hospitals upon following MLCs:
Sl. Name of Name of Hospital MLC No. Nature of No. injured Injury 1 Ishan Maharaja Agrasen 883/20 'Simple Hospital, Dwarka Injury' 2 Jogeshwar Akash Hospital, 714/20 'Simple Dwarka Injury' 3 Guli Mahto Akash Hospital, 715/20 'Simple Dwarka Injury' 4 Manoj Akash Hospital, 716/20 'Grievous Dwarka Injury' 5 Prateek Manipal Hospital, 510/20 'Simple Muniwal Sector-6, Dwarka Injury' 6 Smt. Pankaj Manipal Hospital, 511/20 'Grievous Yadav Sector-6, Dwarka Injury' 7 Tilak Mahto Ayushman 552/20 'Dangerous Hospital, Dwarka Injury' 8 Priyanka Ayushman 553/20 'Dangerous Hospital, Dwarka Injury' 9 Ram Bachan Ayushman 555/20 'Simple Hospital, Dwarka Injury' 10 Ratan Ayushman 557/20 'Simple Hospital, Dwarka Injury' 11 Prakash Ayushman 558/20 'Simple Hospital, Dwarka Injury' 12 Shahjahan Ayushman 559/20 'Simple MACT No. 70/2021 Manoj Vs. Ajay Kumar & Ors. Page 5 of 25 Hospital, Dwarka Injury' 13 Anil Rawat Ayushman 560/20 'Simple Hospital, Dwarka Injury' 14 Tej Bahadur Ayushman 561/20 'Simple Rajbhar Hospital, Dwarka Injury' 15 Sandeep Ayushman 562/20 'Simple Hospital, Dwarka Injury'.
3. FIR No.106/2020 under section 279/337/338 IPC was registered at PS Dwarka South on 18.03.2020 and statement of Smt. Pankaj Kumari Yadav and Sh. Anoop Singh were recorded by the Investigating Officer. Injured Priyanka admitted at Ayushman Hospital, Dwarka upon MLC No.553/20 succumbed to injuries on 19.03.2020 and dead body of deceased was handed over to its relatives after identification and postmortem examination at DDU Hospital, Hari Nagar, Delhi.
4. Respondent Ajay Kumar (driver) produced by Mohit Sharma, SPA (possessory owner) pursuant to notice under section 133 of M.V. Act was formally arrested & released on police bail AND offending RTV No.DL-1VC-0344 seized from the spot was released on superdari after its mechanical inspection. Documents of RTV including RC, Permit, Fitness and Insurance Policy produced by Mohit Sharma (SPA) were verified from concerned authorities and offence under section 304A IPC was added on the basis of Postmortem Report No.438/20. IO, thereafter, concluded investigation and prepared DAR which was filed in Court along with copy of Final Report under section 279/337/338/304A IPC. Defence
5. Respondent Ajay Kumar (driver) has denied involvement and/or negligent driving of RTV by alleging false implication MACT No. 70/2021 Manoj Vs. Ajay Kumar & Ors. Page 6 of 25 AND disputed liability to pay compensation by stating that offending vehicle was insured with Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. from 11.09.2019 to 10.09.2020 vide Policy No. 215500/31/2020/2620.
6. No reply has been filed by Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Inquiry
7. Following issues were settled on 26.02.2024 and matter was posted for petitioner's evidence.
i. Whether injured Manoj is entitled to receive compensation on account of injuries suffered due to rash and negligent driving of RTV No. DL-1VC-0344 by R1/Ajay Kumar (driver) on 18.03.2020 which vehicle was registered in the name of R2/Mohit Sharma and was insured with R3/Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.? ... OPP ii. If issue No.1 is decided in affirmative, then what would constitute just compensation payable to injured and by whom? ...OPP iii. Relief.
8. Injured Manoj Kumar examined as PW-1 has inter alia deposed about - (i) grievous injury sustained in road traffic accident on 18.03.2020 at about 9:45 am after RTV No.DL-1VC- 0344 driven at high speed in zig-zag manner hit the Divider while trying to overtake DTC Bus and 'Overturned' resulting in bodily injury to its occupants; (ii) MLC No. 716/20 prepared at Akash Healthcare Super Specialty Hospital, Dwarka, Delhi; (iii) treatment at Akash Healthcare Super Specialty Hospital, Dwarka, Delhi from 18.03.2020 to 23.03.2020; (iv) treatment at Dr. Baba Saheb Ambedkar Hospital, Rohini, Delhi from 16.04.2020 to 25.04.2020; (v) treatment at Prakash Hospital & Arith MACT No. 70/2021 Manoj Vs. Ajay Kumar & Ors. Page 7 of 25 Chikitsalaya Gorakhpur, Uttar Pradesh from 15.12.2020 to 24.12.2020; (vi) FIR No.106/20 under section 279/337/338/304A IPC registered at PS Dwarka South on 18.03.2020; (vii) expenses incurred on treatment, medicines, conveyance, attendant & special diet; (viii) monthly income Rs.35,000/- by working as Carpenter AND (ix) general and special damages consequent to bodily injury sustained in road accident. He has also relied upon following documents:
i. Copy of Aadhar Card - Ex.PW-1/1; ii. Discharge Summary, Treatment Record & Medical Bills .-
Ex.PW-1/2 (Colly);
iii. DAR - Ex.PW-1/3.
9. Cross-examination of injured (PW-1) by Ld. counsel for insurance company has been recorded and petitioner's evidence was closed on 05.11.2024.
10. No witness has been examined by R1/driver, R2/owner and R3/insurer.
Discussion and Conclusion
11. Advocate Ms. Jyoti Gandhi for injured AND Advocate Sh.
Vikash Sharma for Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. have addressed their submissions.
12. I have carefully perused pleadings and evidence adduced on judicial file. My issue wise finding is recorded below:
13. Issue No.1:
Whether injured Manoj is entitled to receive compensation on account of injuries suffered due to rash and negligent driving of RTV No. DL-1VC-0344 by R1/Ajay Kumar (driver) on 18.03.2020 which vehicle was registered in the name of MACT No. 70/2021 Manoj Vs. Ajay Kumar & Ors. Page 8 of 25 R2/Mohit Sharma and was insured with R3/Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd? ... OPP
14. PW-1 Manoj has deposed about grievous injury sustained in road traffic accident on 18.03.2020 at about 9:45 am after RTV No.DL-1VC-0344 driven at high speed in zig-zag manner hit the Divider while trying to overtake DTC Bus and 'Overturned' resulting in bodily injury to its occupants.
15. His testimony has remained consistent and nothing material could be elicited during cross-examination of injured which could assail his testimony or impeach its veracity.
16. The fact that RTV No.DL-1VC-0344 driven at high speed in zig-zag manner hit the Divider while trying to overtake DTC Bus and 'Overturned' resulting in bodily injury to 14 passengers/occupants and death of Priyanka D/o Sanjeev Sharma who died on 19.03.2020 in course of treatment at Ayushman Hospital, Dwarka, New Delhi is sufficient for applying the principle of res ipsa loquitor.
17. Negligence in the normal parlance is understood as failure to take proper care which a reasonable man would have done under the circumstances and normal rule for the plaintiff to prove negligence is sought to be avoided by applying the principle of res ipsa loquitor. The general purport of the words res ipsa loquitor is that the accident "speaks for itself" or tell its own story and there are cases in which the accident speaks for itself so that it is sufficient for the plaintiff to prove the accident and nothing more. It will then be incumbent upon the defendant to establish that the accident happened due to some cause other than his own negligence.
MACT No. 70/2021 Manoj Vs. Ajay Kumar & Ors. Page 9 of 2518. It is all the more well settled law that negligence of the driver in case of road traffic accident is required to be established on the touchstone of preponderance of probability and standard of proof beyond reasonable doubt does not apply to claim petitions under Motor Vehicle Act as held by Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in para 15 of Bimla Devi & Ors. Vs. Himachal Road Transport Corporation & Ors (2009) 13 SCC 530.
19. Following observations in para 15 of aforesaid judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court being relevant are extracted herein below:
"15. In a situation of this nature, the Tribunal has rightly taken a holistic view of the matter. It was necessary to be borne in mind that strict proof of an accident caused by a particular bus in a particular manner may not be possible to be done by the claimants. The claimants were merely to establish their case on the touchstone of preponderance of probability. The standard of proof beyond reasonable doubt could not have been applied...."
20. Similar observation has been recorded by Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in para 12 of its judgment delivered in National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Smt. Pushpa Rana & Ors. 2007 SCC Online Del 1700 by holding that proceedings under Motor Vehicle Act are not akin to proceeding in a civil suit hence strict rules of evidence are not required to be followed and FIR against the driver along with criminal record of the case showing completion of investigation by the police leading to Final Report are sufficient proof to reach the conclusion that the driver was negligent.
21. FINDING: Issue No.1 is therefore decided by holding that grievous injury sustained by Manoj Kumar in road accident on MACT No. 70/2021 Manoj Vs. Ajay Kumar & Ors. Page 10 of 25 18.03.2020 was caused as a result of rash and negligent driving of RTV No.DL-1VC-0344 by R1/Ajay Kumar (driver) which vehicle was under control and possession of R2/Mohit Sharma (SPA) and insured with Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.
22. Issue No.2 If issue No.1 is decided in affirmative, then what would constitute just compensation payable to injured and by whom? ... OPP
23. Injured Manoj Kumar having suffered bodily injury in motor vehicle accident was shifted to Akash Healthcare Super Specialty Hospital, Dwarka, Delhi where MLC No. 716/20 was prepared recording Grievous Injury. He, thereafter, remained under treatment at (i) Akash Healthcare Super Specialty Hospital, Dwarka, Delhi from 18.03.2020 to 23.03.2020; (ii) Dr. Baba Saheb Ambedkar Hospital, Rohini, Delhi 16.04.2020 to 25.04.2020 AND (iii) Prakash Hospital & Arith Chikitsalaya Gorakhpur, Uttar Pradesh from 15.12.2020 to 24.12.2020.
24. Injured was also examined by the Medical Board, DDU Hospital, Hari Nagar, New Delhi and Disability Certificate assessing 13% permanent physical disability in relation to Bilateral Lower Limbs has been received on 14.11.2022.
25. Quantum of compensation is required to be assessed separately under pecuniary and non-pecuniary heads.
26. At the outset, it has to be borne in mind that compensation is not expected to be a windfall or a bonanza nor it should be niggardly and Courts & Tribunals have a duty to weigh the various factors and quantify the amount of compensation which should be just. What would be "just" compensation is a vexed question. There can be no golden rule applicable to all cases for MACT No. 70/2021 Manoj Vs. Ajay Kumar & Ors. Page 11 of 25 measuring the value of human life or a limb. Measure of damages cannot be arrived at by precise mathematical calculations. It would depend upon the particular facts and circumstances, and attending peculiar or special features, if any, as held by Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Helen C. Rebello Vs. Maharasthra SRTC, 1999 (1) SCC 90.
27. Following para of judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in R.D. Hattangadi Vs. Pest Control (India) Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. (1995) 1 SCC 551 being relevant is extracted herein below:
"9. Broadly speaking while fixing an amount of compensation payable to a victim of an accident, the damages have to be assessed separately as pecuniary damages and special damages. Pecuniary damages are those which the victim has actually incurred and which are capable of being calculated in terms of money; whereas non-pecuniary damages are those which are incapable of being assessed by arithmetical calculations. In order to appreciate two concepts pecuniary damages may include expenses incurred by the claimant: (i) medical attendance; (ii) loss of earning of profit up to the date of trial; (iii) other material loss. So far non-pecuniary damages are concerned, they may include (i) damages for mental and physical shock, pain and suffering, already suffered or likely to be suffered in future; (ii) damages to compensate for the loss of amenities of life which may include a variety of matters i.e. on account of injury the claimant may not be able to walk, run or sit; (iii) damages for the loss of expectation of life, i.e., on account of injury the normal longevity of the person concerned is shortened; (iv) inconvenience, hardship, discomfort, disappointment, frustration and mental stress in life."MACT No. 70/2021 Manoj Vs. Ajay Kumar & Ors. Page 12 of 25
28. Heads of compensation under pecuniary and non- pecuniary damages have been further explained by Hon'ble Apex Court in para 6 of Raj Kumar Vs. Ajay Kumar & Anr. (2011) 1 SCC 343 which reads as under:
"6. The heads under which compensation is awarded in personal injury cases are the following:
Pecuniary damages (Special Damages)
(i) Expenses relating to treatment, hospitalization, medicines, transportation, nourishing food, and miscellaneous expenditure.
(ii) Loss of earnings (and other gains) which the injured would have made had he not been injured, comprising :
(a) Loss of earning during the period of treatment;
(b) Loss of future earnings on account of permanent disability.
(iii) Future medical expenses.
Non-pecuniary damages (General
Damages)
(iv) Damages for pain, suffering and trauma as a consequence of the injuries.
(v) Loss of amenities (and/or loss of prospects of marriage).
(vi) Loss of expectation of life (shortening of normal longevity).
In routine personal injury cases, compensation will be awarded only under heads (i), (ii)(a) and (iv). It is only in serious cases of injury, where there is specific medical evidence corroborating the evidence of the claimant, that compensation will be granted under any of the heads (ii)(b), (iii),
(v) and (vi) relating to loss of future earnings on account of permanent disability, future medical expenses, loss of amenities (and/or MACT No. 70/2021 Manoj Vs. Ajay Kumar & Ors. Page 13 of 25 loss of prospects of marriage) and loss of expectation of life.
NATURE AND EXTENT OF INJURIES
29. Injured Manoj Kumar having suffered bodily injury in motor vehicle accident was shifted to Akash Hospital where he was diagnosed with - 'Bilateral Superior & Inferior Pubic Rami Fracture with Segmental Right Femur Shaft Fracture with Left 7 th & 8th Ribs Fracture with Pleural Effusion Right Side'.
30. No other document has been filed on record or relied in evidence to show any other injury.
MEDICINES AND TREATMENT
31. PW-1 Manoj Kumar has deposed to have spent Rs.10,00,000/- on medicine & treatment. Injured during cross- examination by Ld. counsel for insurance company has nonetheless admitted that Medical Bills against Admission & Treatment at Akash Hospital Delhi was borne by Delhi Arogya Kosh.
32. Aggregate sum of Rs.21,130/- (Rupees Twenty One Thousand One Hundred & Thirty only) against Inpatient Bills, Cash Memo/Tax Invoice is awarded to injured towards pecuniary damage under the head - Medicine & Treatment. CONVEYANCE AND SPECIAL DIET
33. PW-1 Manoj Kumar in para 6 of affidavit Ex.PW-1/A has deposed to have spent Rs.1,00,000/- on conveyance and Rs.2,00,000/- on special diet.
34. Four Ambulance Bills dated 30.03.2020, 01.05.2020 & 16.05.2020 for total Rs.5,700/- has been adduced in evidence whereas Treatment Record & Bills - Ex.PW-1/2 (Colly.) reveals that Manoj Kumar remained admitted at Akash Healthcare Super MACT No. 70/2021 Manoj Vs. Ajay Kumar & Ors. Page 14 of 25 Specialty Hospital, Dwarka, Delhi from 18.03.2020 to 23.03.2020 followed by treatment at Dr. Baba Saheb Ambedkar Hospital, Rohini, Delhi from 16.04.2020 to 25.04.2020 AND treatment at Prakash Hospital & Arith Chikitsalaya Gorakhpur, Uttar Pradesh from 15.12.2020 to 24.12.2020. It is assumed that injured might have used private vehicle/hired taxi for visiting aforesaid hospitals for treatment till 24.12.2020. Accordingly, a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only) is awarded to injured towards conveyance.
35. Similarly, injured Manoj Kumar must have also needed special diet for full and complete recovery from 'Bilateral Superior & Inferior Pubic Rami Fracture with Segmental Right Femur Shaft Fracture with Left 7 th & 8th Ribs Fracture with Pleural Effusion Right Side'. Another sum of Rs.40,000/- (Rupees Forty Thousand only) is therefore awarded towards special diet.
ATTENDANT CHARGES
36. Injured Manoj Kumar having suffered 'Bilateral Superior & Inferior Pubic Rami Fracture with Segmental Right Femur Shaft Fracture with Left 7th & 8th Ribs Fracture with Pleural Effusion Right Side' has been examined by the Medical Board, DDU Hospital, Hari Nagar, New Delhi and Disability Certificate assessing 13% permanent physical disability in relation to Bilateral Lower Limbs has been received on 14.11.2022. He might have needed an attendant to assist him for around six months even if such gratuitous service was rendered by some or the other of his family/relatives. Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in Delhi Transport Corporation and Anr. Vs. Kumari Lalita 1982 SCC Online Delhi 123 has held that the victim cannot be MACT No. 70/2021 Manoj Vs. Ajay Kumar & Ors. Page 15 of 25 deprived of compensation towards gratuitous service rendered by some of his family member. Accordingly, in the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of material on record, he is awarded Rs.10,000/- x 6 months = Rs.60,000/- (Rupees Sixty Thousand only) towards attendant charges. LOSS OF INCOME
37. PW-1 Manoj Kumar in para 6 of affidavit Ex.PW-1/A has deposed about monthly income Rs.35,000/- by working as Carpenter. Injured, nonetheless, during cross-examination by Ld. Counsel for insurance company has admitted to have not filed any document verifying monthly income by working as 'Furniture Polish Worker'. Monthly income of injured in the absence of cogent evidence is taken as per minimum wage of 'Non-Matriculate' @ Rs.16,341/- applicable in Delhi w.e.f. 23.10.2019.
38. Injured Manoj Kumar remained admitted at Akash Healthcare Super Specialty Hospital, Dwarka, Delhi from 18.03.2020 to 23.03.2020 followed by treatment at Dr. Baba Saheb Ambedkar Hospital, Rohini, Delhi from 16.04.2020 to 25.04.2020 AND treatment at Prakash Hospital & Arith Chikitsalaya Gorakhpur, Uttar Pradesh from 15.12.2020 to 24.12.2020. It is assumed that injured would have taken around six months to recover from 'Bilateral Superior & Inferior Pubic Rami Fracture with Segmental Right Femur Shaft Fracture with Left 7th & 8th Ribs Fracture with Pleural Effusion Right Side'. He is, therefore, awarded Rs.16,341/- x 06 months = Rs.98,046/- (Rupees Ninety Eight Thousand & Forty Six only) towards loss of earning in course of treatment and recovery from injury sustained in road accident.
MACT No. 70/2021 Manoj Vs. Ajay Kumar & Ors. Page 16 of 25PAIN AND SUFFERING
39. Following factors are to be taken into account for assessing compensation under the head - Pain and Suffering:
i. Nature of injury;
ii. Parts of body where injuries occurred; iii. Surgeries, if any;
iv. Confinement in hospital; v. Duration of the treatment.
40. Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in para 9 of Arvind Kumar Mishra Vs. New India Assurance Co. Ltd. & Anr. (2010) 10 SCC 254 has observed that whole idea in case of assessment of all damages for personal injury is to put the claimant in the same position as he was insofar as money can. Perfect compensation is hardly possible but one has to keep in mind that the victim has done no wrong; he has suffered at the hands of wrongdoer and Court must take care to give him full and fair compensation for that he had suffered.
41. Injured Manoj Kumar remained admitted at Akash Healthcare Super Specialty Hospital, Dwarka, Delhi from 18.03.2020 to 23.03.2020 followed by treatment at Dr. Baba Saheb Ambedkar Hospital, Rohini, Delhi from 16.04.2020 to 25.04.2020 AND treatment at Prakash Hospital & Arith Chikitsalaya Gorakhpur, Uttar Pradesh from 15.12.2020 to 24.12.2020. It would be apposite to award him a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) under the head - 'Pain & Suffering' AND additional Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only) as damage for 'Mental and Physical Shock'. LOSS OF AMENITIES AND LIFE MACT No. 70/2021 Manoj Vs. Ajay Kumar & Ors. Page 17 of 25
42. Injured Manoj Kumar having suffered 'Bilateral Superior & Inferior Pubic Rami Fracture with Segmental Right Femur Shaft Fracture with Left 7th & 8th Ribs Fracture with Pleural Effusion Right Side' has been opined as case of traumatic post- operated united fracture of right femur shaft with implant in situ and malunited fracture of bilaterla superior & inferior pubic Rami' with permanent physical impairment of '13% (Thirteen Percent) in relation to bilateral lower limbs' which is likely to affect his ability to participate in normal activities, social interactions and overall health, well-being and quality of life. Accordingly, a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) is awarded to injured Manoj Kumar under the head - loss of amenities.
LOSS OF FUTURE INCOME/PROSPECTS
43. Disability Certificate No. F.1(1)/DDU/MB/2022/19741 dated 26.08.2022 opining patient as a case of traumatic post- operated united fracture of right femur shaft with implant in situ and malunited fracture of bilaterla superior & inferior pubic Rami resulting in '13% (Thirteen Percent) permanent physical disability in relation to bilateral lower limbs' has been filed on 14.11.2022.
44. It is well settled law that percentage of loss of earning capacity arising from permanent disability will be different from the percentage of permanent disability and ascertainment of the effect of permanent disability on the actual earning capacity would involve three steps as laid down in para 13 of the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India titled Raj Kumar Vs. Ajay Kumar (Supra).
MACT No. 70/2021 Manoj Vs. Ajay Kumar & Ors. Page 18 of 2545. What is required to be assessed by the Tribunal is the effect of the permanent disability on the earning capacity of the injured and after assessing the loss of earning capacity in terms of percentage of the income, it has to be quantified in terms of money to arrive at the future loss of earning by applying the standard multiplier method used to determine the loss of dependency as held in para 11 of aforesaid judgment titled Raj Kumar Vs. Ajay Kumar (Supra).
46. Considering age, avocation and the fact that injured has been assessed with 13% (Thirteen Percent) permanent physical disability in relation to bilateral lower limbs, this Court is of the view that physical disability consequent to injury sustained in road accident could have resulted in 6% loss of earning capacity.
47. Injured Manoj Kumar having completed 37 years at the time of accident (D.O.B recorded as 01.01.1983 in copy of Aadhar Card & PAN Card) is entitled to loss of future income by applying multiplier of 15 in addition to future prospect @ 40% upon notional monthly income @ Rs.16,341/- of Non Matriculate applicable in Delhi w.e.f. 23.10.2019 as per principles laid down in National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi, (2017) 16 SCC 680.
48. Loss of future income is calculated as - Rs.16,341/- x 140/100 x 15 x 12 x 6/100 = Rs.2,47,075.92/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Forty Seven Thousand Seventy Five & Ninety Two Paise only).
49. Break-up of compensation awarded to injured under pecuniary and non-pecuniary heads is mentioned below in tabulated form:
MACT No. 70/2021 Manoj Vs. Ajay Kumar & Ors. Page 19 of 25 S. No. HEADS AMOUNT (in
Rupees)
1. Medicines & Treatment Rs.21,130/-
2. Conveyance Rs.20,000/-
3. Special Diet Rs.40,000/-
4. Attendant Charges Rs.60,000/-
5. Loss of Income Rs.98,046/-
6. Pain & Suffering Rs.50,000/-
7. Mental & Physical Shock Rs.20,000/-
8. Loss of amenities of life Rs.50,000/-
9. Loss of future income/prospect Rs.2,47,075.92/-
TOTAL Rs.6,06,251.92/-
rounded off to
Rs.6,06,500/-
INTEREST
50. There is nothing on record to justify withholding interest on the award amount. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the present case, it will be just and proper to grant interest @ 7.5% per annum on the award amount in terms of judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Mannat Johar & Anr. (2019) 15 SCC
260. Injured is therefore awarded interest @ 7.5% per annum upon award amount Rs.6,06,500/- (Rupees Six Lakhs Six Thousand & Five Hundred only) from the date of filing of DAR on 21.01.2021 till notice of deposit under Order XXI Rule 1 CPC to petitioner/counsel.
LIABILITY
51. R1/Ajay Kumar (driver) being principal tortfeasor driving RTV No.DL-1VC-0344 in rash and negligent manner resulting in accident and R2/Mohit Sharma (owner) being vicariously liable MACT No. 70/2021 Manoj Vs. Ajay Kumar & Ors. Page 20 of 25 for the act of the driver are liable to pay compensation amount with interest. However, since RTV No.DL-1VC-0344 was insured against Third Party Risk so, R3/Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. being statutorily liable under Section 149 (1) of M.V.Act shall pay compensation along with interest to injured in the absence of any statutory defence under section 149(2) of M.V. Act.
52. FINDING : Issue No.2 is decided accordingly by holding that R3/Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. shall pay the award amount with interest to injured.
RELIEF
53. Thus, in view of foregoing discussion & conclusion and having regard to the facts and circumstances of the present case, award for a sum of Rs.6,06,500/- (Rupees Six Lakhs Six Thousand & Five Hundred only) along with interest @ 7.5% p.a from the date of filing of DAR on 21.01.2021 till notice of deposit under Order XXI Rule 1 CPC is passed in favour of injured and against all respondents.
54. The above-said compensation amount with interest shall be paid to injured by R3/Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.
55. FORM-IVB SUMMARY OF THE COMPUTATION OF AWARD AMOUNT IN INJURY CASE TO BE INCORPORATED IN THE AWARD
1. Date of accident : 18.03.2020
2. Name of the injured : Ram Manuj @ Manoj
3. Age of the injured : 37 years, 02 months & 17 days
4. Occupation of the injured : Carpenter MACT No. 70/2021 Manoj Vs. Ajay Kumar & Ors. Page 21 of 25
5. Income of the injured : Rs.16,341/- (minimum wage of 'Non Matricuate' applicable in Delhi w.e.f. 23.10.2019)
6. Nature of injury : Grievous
7. Medical treatment taken : Akash Healthcare Super by the injured Specialty Hospital, Dwarka, Delhi; Dr. Baba Saheb Ambedkar Hospital, Rohini, Delhi AND Prakash Hospital & Arith Chikitsalaya Gorakhpur, Uttar Pradesh
8. Period of hospitalization : 18.03.2020 to 23.03.2020;
16.04.2020 to 25.04.2020 & 15.12.2020 to 24.12.2020
9. Whether any permanent : Yes disability? If yes, give details.
10. Computation of Compensation S. No. Heads Awarded by the Tribunal
11. Pecuniary Loss:
(i) Expenditure on treatment Rs.21,130/-
(ii) Expenditure on conveyance Rs.20,000/-
(iii) Expenditure on special diet Rs.40,000/-
(iv) Cost of nursing/attendant Rs.60,000/-
(v) Loss of earning capacity 6%
(vi) Loss of income Rs.98,046/-
(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 Rs.20,000/-
physical shock
MACT No. 70/2021 Manoj Vs. Ajay Kumar & Ors. Page 22 of 25
(ii) Pain and suffering Rs.50,000/-
(iii) Loss of amenities of life Rs.50,000/-
(iv) Disfiguration -
(v) Loss of marriage prospects -
(vi) Loss of earning, inconvenience, -
hardship, disappointment,
frustration, mental stress,
dejectment and unhappiness in
future life etc.
13. Disability resulting in loss of earning capacity:
(i) Percentage of disability assessed 13% (Permanent and nature of disability as Physical permanent or temporary Disability)
(ii) Loss of amenities of loss of -
expectation of life span on account of disability
(iii) Percentage of loss of earning 6% capacity in relation to disability
(iv) Loss of future Income - (Income x Rs.2,47,075.92/-
% Earning Capacity x Multiplier)
14. TOTAL COMPENSATION Rs.6,06,251.92/-
rounded off to Rs.6,06,500/-
15. INTEREST AWARDED
16. Interest amount up to the date of @ 7.5% p.a. from award the date of filing of DAR on 21.01.2021 till notice of deposit under Order XXI Rule 1 CPC
17. Total amount including interest Rs.6,06,500/- + interest @ 7.5% p.a. from the date of filing of the DAR on 21.01.2021 till notice of deposit MACT No. 70/2021 Manoj Vs. Ajay Kumar & Ors. Page 23 of 25 under Order XXI Rule 1 CPC
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 By credit in the award amount to the claimant(s). SB Account of the injured 21 Next Date for compliance of the 19.07.2025 award.
56. The award amount shall be deposited by respondent Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. in Account No.42709452600 of MACT, South West, Dwarka Courts, New Delhi at State Bank of India, District Court Complex, Sector-10, Dwarka, New Delhi (IFSC Code SBIN0011566 and MICR Code 110002483) through RTGS/NEFT/IMPS within 30 days of award as per section 168(3) of M.V. Act under intimation to the Nazir of this court with proof of notice to the claimant/injured and his counsel.
57. Statement of injured Ram Manuj @ Manoj regarding financial status, needs and liabilities has been recorded. In view of the said statement and having regard to the facts and circumstances of the present case, the award amount shall be disbursed in following manner:-
S. Name Status Amount of Release Amount No Award Amount of FDR
1. Ram Injured Rs.6,06,500/- + Rs.6,06,500/- Nil Manuj @ interest @ 7.5% with Ram p.a. from the proportionate date of filing of interest in the DAR on MACT Claims 21.01.2021 till SB Account of notice of deposit injured MACT No. 70/2021 Manoj Vs. Ajay Kumar & Ors. Page 24 of 25 under Order XXI Rule 1 CPC
58. Injured has mentioned details of SB Account No.43691826428 with State Bank of India, District Court Complex, Sector-10, Dwarka, New Delhi (IFSC Code SBIN0011566) in his statement recorded on 20.01.2025 and it is requested that cash amount may be transferred in the said SB Account.
59. Accordingly, Manager, State Bank of India, District Courts Complex, Sector-10, Dwarka, New Delhi is directed to transfer Rs.6,06,500/- with proportionate interest in SB Account No. 43691826428 with State Bank of India, District Court Complex, Sector-10, Dwarka, New Delhi (IFSC Code SBIN0011566).
60. Respondent Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. shall inform injured/counsel regarding award amount being deposited in MACT Account through registered post.
61. Copy of award be sent to the Manager, SBI, District Courts Complex, Sector-10, Dwarka, New Delhi for information/ compliance.
62. Dasti copy of award be given to Ld. Counsels for injured and insurance company.
63. Ahlmad is directed to prepare separate miscellaneous file to be listed on 19.07.2025 for filing compliance report.
64. File be consigned to Record Room.
Digitally signedAnnounced in the open Court TARUN by TARUN YOGESH on 29.05.2025 YOGESH Date: 2025.05.31 16:58:38 +0530 (Tarun Yogesh) PO, MACT-01, Dwarka Courts, New Delhi MACT No. 70/2021 Manoj Vs. Ajay Kumar & Ors. Page 25 of 25