Delhi District Court
Hasan vs . Riyajul Hak Ansari & Anr. on 25 April, 2018
IN THE COURT OF SH. RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN:
PRESIDING OFFICER: MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL:
SOUTH EAST DISTRICT/ SAKET COURTS: NEW DELHI
MACT No. 270/18
FIR No. 608/17
PS Jaitpur
Hasan Vs. Riyajul Hak Ansari & Anr.
Injury Case
Hasan S/o Mohd. Sameem,
R/o D1533, Gali No. 6, Vishwkarma Colony,
Jaitpur Extension, Part2, New Delhi
(Petitioner, being minor, is represented through
natural guardian/ mother/ Vahidun)
...................... Petitioner/Claimant
Versus
1. Shri Riyajul Hak Ansari S/o Shri Abdul Gaffar Ansari (Driver)
R/o A755, Gali No. 9, Khadda Colony, Jaitpur Extension,
New Delhi
2. Shri Rahul Sirsiwal S/o Shri Vijay Kumar (Owner)
R/o WZ205, Basai Darapur, Ramesh Nagar,
New Delhi
.....................Respondents
Date of Institution : 13.02.2018
Date of pronouncement : 25.04.2018
JUDGMENT:
1. Present claim proceedings were initiated on the basis of Detailed Accident Report (DAR) filed by the police in respect of injuries suffered by injured namely Hasan (aged 17 years) in a road accident.
2. Brief facts of the case are that on 16.12.2017 at about 09.45 AM, injured/ petitioner was cleaning motorcycle of his employer on Sardar Market Main MACT No. 29/18 Hasan Vs. Riyajul Hak Ansari & Anr. (Page No. 1 of 14 ) Road, Khadda Colony, Jaitpur Extension, New Delhi, suddenly vehicle bearing registration No. DL4CAD1441, being driven by respondent No. 1 in a rash and negligent manner, came from Arpan Vihar side and hit him due to which he suffered injuries. After the accident, he was taken to JPNA Trauma Centre, AIIMS.
3. FIR number 608/17 under Section 279/337 IPC was got registered at PS Jaitpur. Police conducted investigation. After due investigation, police found respondent No. 1/Shri Riyajul Hak Ansari accused of rash and negligent driving and he was chargesheeted for commission of offence punishable under Section 279/337 IPC & Section 3/181 & 146/196 Motor Vehicle Act.
4. During proceedings, respondent No. 1/driver & respondent No. 2/owner appeared on the date of filing of DAR, but they failed to appear subsequently. They were proceeded exparte vide order dated 20.02.2018.
5. Following issues were framed on 18.04.2018: (1) Whether petitioner Mohd. Hasan has sustained grievous hurt on 16.12.2017 in the accident caused by offending vehicle bearing No. DL 4CAC1441 driven by respondent No. 1 in a rash and negligent manner and owned by respondent No. 2? OPP (2) To what amount of compensation, if any, the claimant is entitled? OPP (3) Relief.
6. Perusal of issue No. 1 shows the registration number of offending vehicle as 'DL4CAC1441' whereas correct registration number of offending vehicle is 'DL4CAD1441'. Hence, issue No. 1 stands corrected in that regard. Now, registration number of offending vehicle shall be read as 'DL4CAD1441' in issue No. 1 framed on 18.04.2018.
MACT No. 29/18 Hasan Vs. Riyajul Hak Ansari & Anr. (Page No. 2 of 14 )
7. Since petitioner is a minor, Smt Vahidun (mother of minor petitioner) got herself examined as PW1. She tendered her evidence by way of affidavit of evidence which is Ex. PW1/A. She has relied upon copy of her Aadhar Card as Ex. PW1/1; copy of Aadhar Card of her son (petitioner) as Ex. PW1/2; MLC of petitioner as Ex. PW1/3; copy of Discharge Summary and OPD Cards as Ex. PW1/4 (collectively); original medical bills as Ex. PW1/5 (collectively) and Detailed Accident Report filed by the police as Ex. PW1/6.
8. No other witness was examined by the petitioner.
9. No witness was examined by respondents as they were exparte.
10. After hearing arguments and considering the material on record, my issuewise findings are as follows: Issue No. 1 (Negligence):
11. PW1 Smt Vahidun has categorically deposed in her affidavit of evidence that respondent No. 1 was driving offending vehicle in a rash and negligent manner due to which accident occurred. PW1 was not crossexamined by the respondents as they were already exparte and testimony of PW1 remained unchallenged. Even otherwise, FIR was registered on the complaint of petitioner himself who stated to police that offending vehicle was being driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner due to which accident occurred. On the complaint of petitioner, police registered FIR and conducted investigation. During investigation, it was found by the police that respondent No. 1 was driving offending vehicle without possessing any valid driving licence which led to addition of Section 3/181 of Motor Vehicle Act in the MACT No. 29/18 Hasan Vs. Riyajul Hak Ansari & Anr. (Page No. 3 of 14 ) charge sheet. Respondent No. 1 chose to drive a mechanically propelled vehicle without possessing necessary skills for the same which itself shows negligence on part of respondent No. 1. Furthermore, after due investigation, police found respondent No. 1 accused of rash and negligent driving and he was chargesheeted for commission of offence punishable under Section 279/337 IPC & Section 3/181 & 146/196 Motor Vehicle Act.
12. To determine the negligence of the driver of the offending vehicle, I am being guided by the judgment of Hon'ble High Court (MP) in case titled as "Basant Kaur & Ors Vs. Chattar Pal Singh and Ors" [2003 ACJ 369 MP (DB)], wherein it has been held that registration of a criminal case against the driver of the offending vehicle is enough to record the finding that the driver of offending vehicle is responsible for causing the accident. Further it has been held in catena of cases that the proceedings under the Motor Vehicles Act are not akin to the proceedings as in civil suit and hence strict rules of evidence are not required to be followed in this regard. Further reliance can be placed on the case of "National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Pushpa Rana" (2009 ACJ 287), wherein it was held that in case the petitioner files the certified copy of the criminal record or the criminal record showing the completion of the investigation by the police or the issuance of charge sheet under Section 279/304 A IPC or the certified copy of the FIR or in addition the recovery memo or the mechanical inspection report of the offending vehicle, these documents are sufficient proof to reach to the conclusion that the driver was negligent. It is also settled law that the term rashness and negligence has to be constructed lightly while making a decision on a petition for claim for the same as compared to the word rashness and negligence as finds mention in the Indian Penal Code. This is because the chapter in the Motor Vehicle Act dealing with compensation is a benevolent legislation and not a penal one.
MACT No. 29/18 Hasan Vs. Riyajul Hak Ansari & Anr. (Page No. 4 of 14 )
13. In view of the above discussion, petitioner has succeeded in proving that he suffered injuries due to rash and negligent driving of the respondent No. 1. Accordingly, issue No. 1 is decided in favour of the petitioner and against the respondents.
Issue No. 2 (Compensation):
14. Medical Expenses : After the accident, petitioner was taken to JPNA Trauma Centre, AIIMS, New Delhi. As per MLC Ex. PW1/3 issued from JPNA Trauma Cenrtre, New Delhi, petitioner suffered simple injury in the accident. As per Discharge Summary Ex. PW1/4 issued from JPNA Trauma Centre, AIIMS Hospital, New Delhi, petitioner was diagnosed to have suffered soft tissue injury. He was discharged on the same day of accident. At the time of discharge, he was advised to take various medicines and to come for review in OPD. Petitioner has filed medical bills totaling to Rs.2,067/. Keeping in view the nature of injuries suffered by the petitioner in this accident, petitioner is awarded a sum of Rs.2,100/ towards medical expenses.
15. Compensation for pain and suffering: Petitioner is found to have suffered simple injuries. He suffered laceration over right leg. He has not only suffered physical injuries but also suffered mental trauma. Hence, a sum of Rs.20,000/ is granted towards pain and suffering.
16. Loss of income during treatment: PW1 Smt Vahidun has deposed in his affidavit of evidence that her son (petitioner herein) was doing the work of Helper with one Mr. Pappu and was earning Rs.12,000/ per month at the time of accident. She has claimed that her son could not work for two months. Perusal of documents reveals that there is nothing on record to show either MACT No. 29/18 Hasan Vs. Riyajul Hak Ansari & Anr. (Page No. 5 of 14 ) income or avocation of petitioner. Document regarding educational qualifications of petitioner has also not been filed. Since petitioner has not examined any witness to prove his avocation or earnings, monthly income of injured can be taken as per minimum wages for an unskilled workman at the time of accident, which was Rs.13,350/ per month. Petitioner suffered simple injury in the accident. Keeping in view the nature of injuries suffered by the petitioner, it can be said that he would have taken rest for about one month. Accordingly, petitioner is granted Rs.13,350/ towards loss of income during treatment.
17. Compensation for Special Diet, Attendant and Conveyance: Petitioner has not filed any documentary proof to show money spent by him on attendant, special diet and conveyance. Petitioner suffered laceration on left leg. He also visited hospital for followup treatment. Therefore, he had to incur expenses on conveyance, special diet and attendant charges. Hence, a sum of Rs.5,000/ is granted to petitioner under this head.
18. Loss of amenities of life: Petitioner suffered simple injury in the accident. He suffered laceration over left leg. He has certainly undergone mental shock and has suffered loss of amenities of life. Therefore, interest of justice demands that he should be compensated on that ground also. Hence, petitioner is awarded Rs.5,000/ towards loss of amenities of life.
19. Thus, the total compensation to which petitioner is entitled comes as under: S.No Details Amount 1 Compensation for medical expenses Rs.2,100/ Compensation for special diet, attendant and Rs.5,000/ 2 conveyance MACT No. 29/18 Hasan Vs. Riyajul Hak Ansari & Anr. (Page No. 6 of 14 ) 3 Compensation for pain and sufferings Rs.20,000/ Compensation for loss of income during Rs.13,350/ 4 treatment 5 Loss of amenities of life Rs.5,000/ TOTAL Rs.45,450/ Hence, the petitioner is awarded a total amount of Rs.45,450/ (Rs. Forty Five Thousand Four Hundred and Fifty Only).
Relief :
20. The petitioner/injured is hereby awarded a sum of Rs.45,450/ (Rs. Forty Five Thousand Four Hundred and Fifty Only) alongwith interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of DAR till the date of realization in favour of petitioner against the respondents on account of their liability being joint and several. Respondents, being driver and owner of offending vehicle at the time of accident, are jointly and severally liable to discharge the liability of the award amount within a period of 30 days from today along with the interest @ 9% per annum, failing which interest @ 12% per annum shall be charged for the period of delay.
Release of awarded amount :
21. Petitioner is awarded a compensation of Rs.45,450/ (Rs. Forty Five Thousand Four Hundred and Fifty Only) with proportionate interest. His entire award amount shall be kept in the form of FDR till he attains the age of 21 years.
22. Deposition of awarded amount with STATE BANK OF INDIA, Saket Court Branch, New Delhi.
MACT No. 29/18 Hasan Vs. Riyajul Hak Ansari & Anr. (Page No. 7 of 14 )
23. Upon the aforesaid amount being deposited, the State Bank of India, Saket Court Complex, New Delhi, is directed to keep the awarded amount in the "Fixed deposit/saving account" in the following manner:
(i) The interest on the fixed deposit be paid to the petitioner/claimant by Automatic Credit of interest of his saving bank account with State Bank of India, Saket Court Branch, New Delhi.
(ii) Withdrawal from the aforesaid account shall be permitted to claimant/ petitioner after due verification and the Bank shall issue photo identity Card to claimant/petitioner to facilitate identity.
(iii) No cheque book be issued to claimant/petitioner without the permission of this Court.
(iv) The original fixed deposit receipts shall be retained by the Bank in safe custody. However, the original pass Book shall be given to the claimant/ petitioner alongwith photocopy of the FDR's.
(v) The original fixed deposit receipts shall be handed over to claimant/ petitioner at the end of the fixed deposit period.
(vi) No loan, advance or withdrawal shall be allowed on the said fixed deposit receipts without the permission of this Court.
(vii) Half yearly statement of account be filed by the Bank in this court.
(viii) On the request of claimant/petitioner, the Bank shall transfer the Savings Account to any other branch of State Bank of India, according to his convenience.
(ix) Claimant/petitioner shall furnish all the relevant documents for opening of the Saving Bank Account and Fixed Deposit Account to Branch Manager, State Bank of India, Saket Courts Complex Branch, New Delhi.
Directions for the respondents. Respondents are directed to file the MACT No. 29/18 Hasan Vs. Riyajul Hak Ansari & Anr. (Page No. 8 of 14 ) compliance report of their having deposited the awarded amount with the State Bank of India, Saket Court Branch in this Tribunal within a period of 30 days from today.
24. Respondents will intimate to the claimant/ petitioner about it having deposited the cheque in favour of petitioner in terms of the award, at the address of the petitioner mentioned at the title of the award, so as to facilitate her to withdraw the same.
25. In pursuance to the directions passed in Modified Motor Accident Claims Tribunal Agreed Procedure as approved by Hon'ble High Court of Delhi, petitioner/claimant/injured is directed to open a savings bank account in a nationalized bank near the place of his residence and the concerned bank is directed to not issue any cheque book and/or debit card to the claimant(s) and if the same have already been issued, the bank is directed to cancel the same and make an endorsement on the passbook of the claimant(s) to the effect that no cheque book and/ or debit card shall be issued without permission of the Court. The claimant(s) is directed to produce the copy of the order before the concerned bank whereupon the bank is directed to make the endorsement on the passbook. The claimant(s) is directed to produce the passbook with the necessary endorsement as well as Aadhar Card and PAN Card before this Tribunal on the next date of hearing.
26. Copy of this Award be given to the parties free of cost and a copy be also sent to SBI, Saket Court Complex Branch for record and compliance.
FORM - IV B MACT No. 29/18 Hasan Vs. Riyajul Hak Ansari & Anr. (Page No. 9 of 14 ) SUMMARY OF COMPUTATION OF AWARD AMOUNT IN INJURY CASES TO BE INCORPORATED IN THE AWARD
1. Date of accident: 16.12.2017
2. Name of the injured: Hasan
3. Age of the injured: 17 years
4. Occupation of the injured: Not proved by petitioner
5. Income of the injured: Rs.13,350/ (as per minimum wages)
6. Nature of injury: Simple
7. Medical treatment taken by the injured: After the accident, petitioner was taken to JPNA Trauma Centre, AIIMS, New Delhi where doctor opined that he has suffered simple injury in the accident. He was diagnosed to have suffered soft tissue injury. He was discharged on the same day of accident. At the time of discharge, he was advised to take various medicines and to come for review in OPD.
8. Period of hospitalization: On 16.12.2017.
9. Whether any permanent disability? If yes, give details: Petitioner has not suffered any permanent disability.
10. Computation of Compensation S. No. Heads Awarded by the Tribunal
11. Pecuniary Loss:
(i) Expenditure on treatment Rs.2,100/
(ii) Expenditure on conveyance
(iii) Expenditure on special diet Rs.5,000/
(iv) Cost of nursing/attendant
(v) Loss of earning capacity Petitioner has not
suffered any disability
which resulted in loss of
earning capacity
(vi) Loss of income Rs.13,350/
MACT No. 29/18 Hasan Vs. Riyajul Hak Ansari & Anr. (Page No. 10 of 14 )
(vii) Any other loss which may require any Already included in 11
special treatment or aid to the injured for (i) to (vi) and 12 (i) to (v) the rest of his life
12. NonPecuniary Loss:
(i) Compensation for mental and physical Already included in 12 shock (ii) and (iii)
(ii) Pain and suffering Rs.20,000/
(iii) Loss of amenities of life Rs.5,000/
(iv) Disfiguration NIL
(v) Loss of marriage prospects NIL
(vi) Loss of earning, inconvenience, hardships, Already included in 11 disappointment, frustration, mental stress, (i) to (vi) and 12 (i) to (v) dejectment and unhappiness in future life etc.
13. Disability resulting in loss of earning capacity:
(i) Percentage of disability assessed and nature Petitioner has not of disability as permanent or temporary suffered any disability
(ii) Loss of amenities or loss of expectation of Already included in 12 life span on account of disability (iii)
(iii) Percentage of loss of earning capacity in Petitioner has not relation to disability suffered any disability
(iv) Loss of future income(Income x % Petitioner has not Earning Capacity x Multiplier) suffered any disability
14. TOTAL COMPENSATION Rs.45,450/
15. INTEREST AWARDED @9% per annum
16. Interest amount up to the date of award Rs.818/
17. Total amount including interest Rs.46,268/
18. Award amount released NIL
19. Award amount kept in FDRs Entire award amount.
20. Mode of disbursement of the award amount SBI, Saket Court to the claimant(s). (Clause 29) Complex, Saket, New Delhi is directed to open bank account in the name of petitioner and to keep FDs as per directions.
MACT No. 29/18 Hasan Vs. Riyajul Hak Ansari & Anr. (Page No. 11 of 14 )
21. Next date for compliance of the award. 28.05.2018.
(Clause 31) FORMV COMPLIANCE OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE MODIFIED CLAIMS TRIBUNAL AGREED PROCEDURE TO BE MENTIONED IN THE AWARD 1 Date of the accident. 16.12.2017 2 Date of intimation of the accident 18.12.2017 by the Investigating Officer to the Claims Tribunal.
3 Date of intimation of the accident Not applicable as offending by the Investigating Officer to the vehicle was not insured at Insurance Company. the time of accident.
4 Date of filing of Report under Not known Section 173 Cr.P.C. before the Metropolitan Magistrate.
5 Date of filing of Detailed Accident 13.02.2018 Information Report (DAR) by the Investigating Officer before Claims Tribunal.
6 Date of service of DAR on the Not applicable as offending Insurance Company. vehicle was not insured at the time of accident.
7 Date of service of DAR on the 13.02.2018 claimant(s).
8 Whether DAR was complete in all Yes respects?
9 If not, state deficiencies in the Not applicable.
DAR?
10 Whether the police has verified the Yes.
documents filed with DAR?
11 Whether there was any delay or Not applicable.
deficiency on the part of the Investigating Officer? If so, MACT No. 29/18 Hasan Vs. Riyajul Hak Ansari & Anr. (Page No. 12 of 14 ) whether any action/ direction warranted?
12 Date of appointment of the Not applicable as offending
Designated Officer by the vehicle was not insured at
Insurance Company. the time of accident.
13 Name, address and contact Not applicable as offending
number of the Designated Officer vehicle was not insured at of the Insurance Company. the time of accident. 14 Whether the Designated Officer of Not applicable as offending the Insurance Company submitted vehicle was not insured at his report within 30 days of the the time of accident. DAR?
15 Whether the Insurance Company Not applicable as offending admitted the liability? If so, vehicle was not insured at whether the Designated Officer of the time of accident. the Insurance Company fairly computed the compensation in accordance with law.
16 Whether there was any delay or Not applicable as offending deficiency on the part of the vehicle was not insured at Designated Officer of the the time of accident. Insurance Company? If so, whether any action/direction warranted?
17 Date of response of the claimant(s) Not applicable as offending
to the offer of the Insurance vehicle was not insured at
Company. the time of accident.
18 Date of the award. 25.04.2018
19 Whether the award was passed Yes, since respondents are
with the consent of the parties? exparte.
20. Whether the claimant(s) were Yes
directed to open savings bank
account(s) near their place of
residence?
21. Date of order by which claimant(s) 25.04.2018 were directed to open savings bank MACT No. 29/18 Hasan Vs. Riyajul Hak Ansari & Anr. (Page No. 13 of 14 ) 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 and endorsement to this effect on the passbook(s)
22. Date of which the claimant(s) To be produced by the produced the passbook of their petitioner on the next date savings bank account near the i.e. 28.05.2018 place of their residence alongwith the endorsement, PAN Card and Aadhar Card?
23. Permanent Residential Address of As per memo of parties the claimant(s)
24. Details of savings bank account(s) To be produced by the of the claimant(s) and the address petitioner on the next date of the bank with IFSC Code. i.e. 28.05.2018
25. Whether the claimant(s) savings Petitioner is directed to open bank account(s) is near his place of saving bank account in a residence? nationalized bank near the place of his residence
26. Whether the claimant(s) examined No, but financial condition at the time of passing of the award of petitioner was inquired. to ascertain his/their financial condition?
Announced in open Court
Dated: 25.04.2018 (Raj Kumar Chauhan)
POMACT02/(South East District)
Saket, New Delhi/25.04.2018
MACT No. 29/18 Hasan Vs. Riyajul Hak Ansari & Anr. (Page No. 14 of 14 )