Delhi District Court
Smt. Ishwanti vs Sh. Joginder on 20 October, 2010
IN THE COURT OF SH. DINESH BHATT, PO,MACT(NORTH)/
TIS HAZARI COURTS, DELHI
FATAL CASE:
Suit No.:315/10
Unique ID no.:02401C0375742010
1. Smt. Ishwanti
W/o Late Sh. Ishwar Singh
2. Sh. Satish Kumar
S/o Late Sh. Ishwar Singh
Both R/o Village Halalpur,
Tehsil Kharkhoda, Distt. Sonepat,
Haryana
3. Smt. Rekha Rani
W/o Sh. Amit Kumar
R/o Netaji Nagar,
Bahadurgarh, Haryana
4. Smt. Himani
W/o Sh. Narinder Kumar
R/o Village Ahullana,
Distt. Sonepat, Haryana
Suit no.:315/10 Page1/10
5. Smt. Sona Devi
W/o Sh. Hoshiar Singh
6. Sh. Hoshiar Singh
S/o Sh. Giani Ram
Both R/o Village Halalpur,
Tehsil Kharkhoda, Distt. Sonepat,
Haryana ..........Petitioners
Versus
1. Sh. Joginder
S/o Sh. Puran Chand
R/o Village Harichack
P.S. Rajbagh Distt. Kathuwa
J & K
2. Sh. Ravinder Chaudhary
S/o Sh. Kundan Singh
R/o H. No. 90, Sector28,
Faridabad
3. M/s Reliance General Insurance
Co. Ltd.
19 Reliance Centre,
2nd floor, FCO2, Sector16,
Faridabad, Haryana ..........Respondents
Date of Institution : 19/08/2010
Date on which order was reserved : 20/10/2010
Date of Decision : 20/10/2010
Suit no.:315/10 Page2/10
APPLICATION U/s 166 & 140 OF MOTOR
VEHICLES ACT 1988 FOR GRANT OF
COMPENSATION
JUDGMENT/AWARD:
1. This is a case for claim of compensation on account of death of Ishwar Singh in an accident dt. 27/06/10 while he was on his official duty.
2. Petitioner's case is that the deceased was on his duty on 27/06/10 at the baricade near Pul Mithai, Qutab Road, Delhi. At the time of checking of the vehicles the truck bearing no. HR 38B 7900 (offending vehicle) driven by respondent no. 1 in rash and negligent manner came from Mori Gate, Delhi side and hit the deceased causing grievous injuries. The deceased was taken to the hospital and was admitted for treatment but succumbed to his injuries on 28/06/10. FIR was lodged and postmortem was conducted.
3. Respondent no. 1 is the driver, respondent no. 2 the owner and respondent no. 3 the insurer of the offending vehicle.
4. Respondent no. 1 & 2 have denied their involvement in the accident in question and have stated that they have been falsely implicated in the case.
5. Respondent no. 3 has admitted the insurance policy.
6. Detailed Accident Report alongwith copy of FIR, site plan, Suit no.:315/10 Page3/10 postmortem report, MLC, RC, driving license, fitness, mechanical inspection report, photocopy of photographs, treatment expenses of the deceased, copy of salary certificate, affidavit of petitioner no. 1, insurance policy and statement of eye witness have been filed on record.
7. From the pleadings of the parties following issues were framed for consideration:
1. Whether the deceased Ishwar Singh suffered injuries and later died due to injuries caused due to rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle bearing no. HR 38N 7900 driven by respondent no. 1 as alleged?
2. What amount of compensation the petitioners are entitled to and from whom?
3. Relief.
Issue wise findings:
8. Issue no. 1: PW2 is the eye witness who has stated that on 27/06/10 he alongwith deceased was on duty. While deceased was checking vehicles, respondent no. 1 driving the offending vehicle in rash and Suit no.:315/10 Page4/10 negligent manner hit the deceased and ran away after causing accident. PW1 alongwith Const. Murari had chased the offending Truck and had also give a message on wireless to PCR Van. The said Truck was apprehended near Ram Nagar Market, opposite S.N.R. Transport, Delhi. In crossexamination PW2 denied the suggestion that the accident was not caused by the offending vehicle but by other vehicle. No evidence has been led by respondents.
As per FIR a case U/s 279/304A IPC had been registered against respondent no. 1. As per postmortem report, deceased had succumbed to the injuries which were antemortem in nature and were caused by blunt force impact possible in a road traffic accident. As per MLC form, deceased had been brought to the hospital with injuries with the alleged history of road traffic accident. As per mechanical inspection report the offending vehicle had damaged parts.
Accordingly, the version of the petitioner is unrebutted and corroborated from the evidence available on record.
Accordingly, issue no. 1 is decided in favour of the petitioners.
9. Issue no. 2: In view of the findings of issue no. 1, petitioners are entitled to compensation.
Deceased was working as Head Constable in Delhi Police and is survived by his widow, major son, two married daughters, Suit no.:315/10 Page5/10 mother and father.
PW1 has produced service record of the deceased, as per which the date of birth of the deceased was 05/05/1961 and the last drawn salary of the deceased was Rs. 25,304/ p.m. The deceased therefore, as per his service record was 49 years at the time of accident in question and was drawing gross salary of Rs. 25,304/ p.m. with Rs. 60/ as conveyance allowance. Deducting Rs. 60/ therefrom, the gross earning would be Rs. 25,244/ p.m. The income of the deceased was taxable but there is no record as to what was the actual tax deducted from the salary of the deceased. Taking into consideration the annual salary of the deceased on the basis of the last drawn salary, the tax as per present slab of 10% would be Rs. 4,428/. The annual income would therefore be (25,244/ X 12) () Rs. 4,428/ = Rs. 2,98,500/ p.a. The age of the deceased was 49 years therefore 30% of the salary is to be added towards future prospects of the deceased.
The deceased is survived by his widow, one major son aged 24 years, two married daughters, mother and father. PW3 has stated that the father of the deceased was not working, therefore, was dependent on the deceased. Father of the deceased is 75 years of age and there is no contrary evidence therefore, the father can be presumed to be a dependent. There is however, no explanation as to why the major son of the deceased aged 24 years was not capable of earning or Suit no.:315/10 Page6/10 was completely dependent on the deceased. Therefore, on the basis of the said facts available on record, the deceased had three dependents. Accordingly, 1/3rd of the income is to be deducted on account of his personal expenses.
Accordingly, petitioners are entitled to total compensation of (Rs. 2,98,500 + 30% of Rs. 2,98,500) X 13 X 2/3 = Rs. 3,36,3100/ + Rs. 10,000/ on account of loss of estate, + Rs. 10,000/ on account of loss of consortium + Rs. 5,000/ on account of funeral expenses + Rs. 20,000/ on account of love and affection + Rs. 5,518/ as actual medical expenses for the treatment of the deceased. Total Rs. 34,13,618/ (Rupees Thirty Four Lakh Thirteen Thousand Six Hundred and Eighteen Only).
10. LIABILITY: There is no dispute in regard to the driving license or the violation of the insurance policy. Accordingly, respondent no. 1 & 2 are jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation. Respondent no. 3 to indemnify the claim.
11. Issue no. 3 (RELIEF): While granting relief to the petitioners, interest @ 7.5 % p.a., from the date of petition till realization is also allowed on the award.
12. In view of the above, the following award is passed: Suit no.:315/10 Page7/10 AWARD : The petition is allowed. The respondents 1 & 2 being the driver and owner are jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation.
However respondent number 3 being the insurance company shall pay a compensation of Rs. 34,13,618/ (Rupees Thirty Four Lakh Thirteen Thousand Six Hundred and Eighteen Only) less interim award, if any, within one month along with the interest @ 7.5 % p.a., from the date of petition till realization (excepting for the periods not specifically allowed) to the petitioners. Compensation amount be deposited within one month from today. Out of the total compensation, 40% share alongwith proportionate interest shall be given to petitioner no. 1, petitioner no. 2 to 4 shall be entitled to 10% each and petitioner no. 5 & 6 shall be entitled to 15% each.
80% share of petitioner no. 1 be kept in FDR for a period of 02 years, 03 years, 05 years & 09 years in equal proportions with liberty to draw monthly interests. 50% share of other petitioners i.e. petitioner nos. 2 to 6 be kept in FDR for a period of 01 year. The remaining share of all the petitioners be released on deposit.
13. The Manager SBI, Tis Hazari, shall open a Saving Account in the name of the petitioners and release/convert the award amount into FDRs as directed.
Suit no.:315/10 Page8/10
14. The monthly interest on all the aforementioned deposit of petitioner no. 1 shall be credited to the said account by way of automatic credit into the Saving Account.
15. The petitioners shall be at liberty to withdraw from the aforesaid accounts after due verification by the bankers, who shall issue photo identity card to the claimants to facilitate the establishment of identity and withdrawal.
16. The original FDRs shall be retained by the Bank in safe custody while original passbook shall be given to the claimants/petitioners alongwith the photocopy of the FDRs.
17. The original FDRs shall be handed over to the claimant at the end of the fixed deposit period.
No loan, advance or withdrawal shall be allowed on the said FDRs without the permission of the Court.
18. On the request of the claimant, the bank shall transfer the Saving Account to any other branch of the SBI in Delhi according to the convenience of the claimant.
19. Accordingly, it is directed that respondent no. 3 shall deposit the amount of compensation, awarded to the petitioner, by way of separate crossed cheques, in the name of the petitioners with the SBI, Tis Hazari, as directed above, within 30 days from today. A copy of the award be sent to Manager, SBI, Tis Hazari for compliance. Suit no.:315/10 Page9/10
20. No orders as to costs A copy of the award be supplied to the parties, free of cost, File be consigned to Record Room.
21. A compliance report shall be filed by the Insurance Company about the deposit of the award amount, as per directions alongwith a copy of the notice to the claimant and the counsel for claimant, intimating about the deposit of the cheque by 23/11/10.
22. Manager, SBI, shall file a compliance report about opening of the saving bank account in the name of the claimant and preparation of FDRs by 23/11/10.
23. Ahlmad is directed to prepare a separate miscellaneous file containing a copy of the petition, memo of parties, copy of award and last proceeding sheet and put up the same alongwith the compliance report aforementioned on 23/11/10.
Announced in the open court (DINESH BHATT)
on 20/10/2010 PO, MACT/Delhi
20/10/2010
Suit no.:315/10 Page10/10