Delhi District Court
Rahul vs Rama Shankar Singh on 21 July, 2025
IN THE COURT OF SHRI TARUN YOGESH
LD. PO-MACT-01, SOUTH-WEST DISTRICT,
DWARKA COURTS, NEW DELHI
MACT No.695/2018
CNR No. DLSW01-014572-2018
FIR No. 255/2018
P.S. Kapashera
In the matter of :
1) Sh. Rahul
S/o Sh. Raj Kumar
R/o H. No. 1075,
Gali No.6, Kapashera,
New Delhi. ... (Petitioner)
Versus
1) Sh. Rama Shankar Singh
S/o Sh. Mata Pher Singh
R/o 582 Atta Chakki to Khari
Kuan, Bijwasan, New Delhi. .... (Driver)
2) Sh. Parvesh Rana
S/o Sh. Dalip Rana
R/o 502, Rly-Xing to Post Office
Bijwasan Village,
New Delhi-110061. .... (Owner)
3) United India Insurance Co. Ltd.
.... (Insurance Company)
.... Respondents
Date of Institution : 03.08.2018
Date of Judgment : 21.07.2025
MACT No.695/2018 Rahul Vs. Rama Shankar Singh & Ors. Page No. 1 of 22
FORM - V
COMPLIANCE OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE
MODIFIED CLAIMS TRIBUNAL AGREED PROCEDURE
TO BE MENTIONED IN THE AWARD
1. Date of the accident 30.05.2016
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 03.08.2018
Report (DAR) by the investigating Officer
before Claims Tribunal (Clause 10)
6. Date of Service of DAR on the Insurance 03.08.2018
Company (Clause 11)
7. Date of service of DAR on the claimant(s). 03.08.2018
(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 No
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)
MACT No.695/2018 Rahul Vs. Rama Shankar Singh & Ors. Page No. 2 of 22
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
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 11.07.2025
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 03.08.2018
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 21.04.2025
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 H. No. 1075, Gali
Claimant(s) (Clause 27) No.6, Kapashera,
New Delhi.
24. Details of saving bank account(s) of the S.B. Account
claimant(s) and the address of the bank with No.4320371776 in
IFSC Code (Clause 27) SBI, District
MACT No.695/2018 Rahul Vs. Rama Shankar Singh & Ors. Page No. 3 of 22
Court Complex
Dwarka, Sector-
10, Dwarka, Delhi
(IFSC Code:
SBIN0011566)
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 at
Tribunal in which the award amount is to be SBI Dwarka,
deposited/transferred. Sector-10, Dwarka
Courts Complex,
IFSC Code:
SBIN0011566 &
MICR No.
110002483.
AWAR D
Preface
1. Detailed Accident Report (DAR) seeking compensation
for bodily injury suffered in motor vehicle accident has been filed
along with copy of Final Report in FIR No.255/2018 PS
Kapashera, Delhi.
Background
2. As gleaned from DAR read with Final Report under
section 279/338 IPC, injured Rahul riding the pillion of Scooty
No.DL-12SD-8391 driven by Deepak met with an accident in
front of Bharat Petrol Pump, Bijwasan Road, Delhi on
30.05.2018 at about 3:22 pm after his Scooty was hit by
offending RTV No.DL-1VA-9964 coming from opposite side at
high speed in rash and negligent manner as a result of which he
MACT No.695/2018 Rahul Vs. Rama Shankar Singh & Ors. Page No. 4 of 22
fell down and suffered injuries. He was shifted to Safdarjung
Hospital, Delhi where MLC No.132226/18 was prepared
recording – (i) Fracture wound over medial aspect of right leg;
(ii) Tenderness; (iii) Multiple Abrasions AND patient was
advised to undergo X-ray Test.
3. FIR No.255/2018 under section 279/337 IPC was
registered at PS Kapashera on 30.05.2018 and site-plan was
prepared at the instance of Deepak. Respondent Rama Shankar
Singh (driver) produced by Pravesh Rana (owner) pursuant to
notice under section 133 M.V. Act was formally arrested on
01.06.2018 and released on police bail whereas documents
including DL, RC, Permit, Fitness and insurance policy seized
from respondents were verified from concerned authorities. RTV
No.DL-1VA-9964 AND Honda Activa Scooty no.DL-12SD-8391
seized from the spot were released on superdari after their
mechanical inspection and offence under section 338 IPC was
added on the basis of final opinion of grievous injury. Statement
of witnesses were recorded AND IO, thereafter, concluded
investigation and prepared DAR which was filed in Court along
with copy of Final Report under section 279/338 IPC.
Defence
4. Respondents Rama Shankar Singh (driver) and Pravesh
Rana (owner) have filed joint reply disputing (i) negligence AND
(ii) liability to pay compensation by contending about Valid &
Effective Licence held by the driver and Policy No.
2219043117P104052001 of RTV Bus insured with United India
Insurance Co. Ltd. from 14.06.2017 to 13.06.2018.
MACT No.695/2018 Rahul Vs. Rama Shankar Singh & Ors. Page No. 5 of 22
5. Respondent United India Insurance Co. Ltd. on its part has
filed ‘Legal Offer’ assessing compensation Rs.74,172/- plus
Actual Medical Bills for ‘Bodily Injury’ suffered in motor vehicle
accident.
Inquiry
6. Following issues were settled on 17.12.2018 and matter
was posted for petitioner’s evidence.
i. Whether Rahul sustained grievous injuries
in a motor vehicle accident dt. 30.05.2018
due to rash and negligent driving of vehicle
no.DL-1VA-9964 being driven by
respondent no.1 Rama Shankar Singh,
owned by respondent no.2 Parvesh Rana
and insured by respondent no.3 United
India Insurance Co. Ltd.? …OPP
ii. Whether the petitioner is entitled to claim
compensation, if so, what amount and from
whom? …OPP
iii. Relief.
7. Injured Rahul Kumar examined as PW-1 has inter-alia
deposed about (i) grievous injuries suffered in motor vehicle
accident in front of Bharat Petrol Pump, Bijwasan Road, Delhi
on 30.05.2018 at about 3:22 pm after his Honda Activa Scooty
No.DL-12SD-8391 was hit by offending RTV No. DL-1VA-9964
coming from opposite side at high speed in rash and negligent
manner; (ii) treatment at Safdarjung Hospital, Delhi; Yadav
Hospital, Dundahera, Haryana AND Bajaj Fracture Clinic &
Nursing Home, Old Gurgaon Road, Haryana; (iii) monthly
income Rs.15,000/- by doing private work as ‘Plumber’ and
‘Supervisor’ AND (iv) general and special damages consequent
MACT No.695/2018 Rahul Vs. Rama Shankar Singh & Ors. Page No. 6 of 22
to bodily injury suffered in road accident. He has relied upon
following documents:
i. Copy of Aadhar Card – Ex.PW-1/1;
ii. DAR – Ex.PW-1/2 &
iii. Copy of Mark-sheets of Secondary School Examination,
2015 – Ex.PW-1/3.
8. Cross-examination of injured by Ld. counsel for insurance
company has been recorded and petitioner’s evidence was closed
on 24.02.2025.
9. No witness has been examined by driver, owner and
insurer and respondents’ evidence was also closed on same day.
Discussion and Conclusion
10. Advocate Sh. Pradeep Yadav for injured AND Advocate
Sh. Ashok Kumar Vashishtha for United India Insurance Co. Ltd.
have addressed their submissions.
11. I have carefully perused pleadings and evidence adduced
on judicial file. My issue wise finding is recorded below:
12. Issue No.1:
Whether Rahul sustained grievous injuries
in a motor vehicle accident dt. 30.05.2018
due to rash and negligent driving of vehicle
no.DL-1VA-9964 being driven by
respondent no.1 Rama Shankar Singh,
owned by respondent no.2 Parvesh Rana
and insured by respondent no.3 United
India Insurance Co. Ltd.? … OPP
13. Injured Rahul in his examination-in-chief has deposed
about grievous injuries suffered in motor vehicle accident in front
of Bharat Petrol Pump, Bijwasan Road, Delhi on 30.05.2018 at
about 3:22 pm after his Honda Activa Scooty No.DL-12SD-8391
MACT No.695/2018 Rahul Vs. Rama Shankar Singh & Ors. Page No. 7 of 22
was hit by offending RTV No. DL-1VA-9964 coming from
opposite side at high speed in rash and negligent manner.
14. His testimony has remained consistent and suggestions
imputing (i) violation of section 129 M.V. Act w.r.t. Protective
Headgear (Helmet) AND (ii) negligence of Deepak (driver of
Scooty) has been denied by injured during his cross-examination
by Ld. counsel for insurance company.
15. Respondents Rama Shankar Saingh (driver) AND Pravesh
Rana (owner), on the other hand, have not entered the witness-
box to rebut allegation of rash and negligent driving of RTV Bus
No.DL-1VA-9964 resulting in bodily injury suffered by injured
Rahul in motor vehicle accident. Adverse inference is therefore
required to be raised against the driver as per dicta of Hon’ble
High Court of Orissa in National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs.
Durdadshya Kumar Samal & Ors. 1987 SCC Online Ori. 57
AND Cholamandalam MS General Insurance Co. Vs. Smt.
Kamlesh & Ors. decided by Hon’ble High Court of Delhi on 11 th
November, 2008.
16. It is 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.
17. Following observations in para 15 of aforesaid judgment of
Hon’ble Apex Court being relevant are extracted herein below:
MACT No.695/2018 Rahul Vs. Rama Shankar Singh & Ors. Page No. 8 of 22
“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….”
18. 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.
19. FINDING : Issue No.1 is therefore decided by holding
that grievous injury suffered by Rahul in motor vehicle accident
on 30.05.2018 was caused as a result of rash and negligent
driving of RTV Bus No.DL-1VA-9964 by Rama Shankar Singh
(driver) which vehicle was registered in the name of Pravesh
Rana (owner) and insured with United India Insurance Co. Ltd.
(insurer).
20. Issue No.2
MACT No.695/2018 Rahul Vs. Rama Shankar Singh & Ors. Page No. 9 of 22
Whether the petitioner is entitled to claim
compensation, if so, what amount and from
whom? …OPP
21. Injured Rahul having suffered bodily injury in motor
vehicle accident was shifted to Safdarjung Hospital, Delhi where
MLC No.132226/18 was prepared recording – (i) Fracture wound
over medial aspect of right leg; (ii) Tenderness; (iii) Multiple
Abrasions AND patient was advised to undergo X-ray Test. He
has also deposed about treatment at (i) Yadav Hospital,
Dundahera, Haryana: (ii) Bajaj Fracture Clinic & Nursing Home,
Old Gurgaon Road, Haryana AND copies of prescriptions dated
31.05.2018; 02.06.2018 & 06.06.2018 of Yadav Hospital,
Dundahera, Old Delhi Gurgaon Road, Haryana have been
attached with Final Report/DAR.
22. Quantum of compensation is required to be assessed
separately under pecuniary and non-pecuniary heads.
23. 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
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.
MACT No.695/2018 Rahul Vs. Rama Shankar Singh & Ors. Page No. 10 of 22
24. 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.”
25. 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:
MACT No.695/2018 Rahul Vs. Rama Shankar Singh & Ors. Page No. 11 of 22
“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
loss of prospects of marriage) and loss of
expectation of life.
NATURE AND EXTENT OF INJURIES
MACT No.695/2018 Rahul Vs. Rama Shankar Singh & Ors. Page No. 12 of 22
26. MLC No.132226/18 of Rahul prepared at Safdarjung
Hospital, Delhi mentions – (i) Fracture wound over medial aspect
of right leg; (ii) Tenderness; (iii) Multiple Abrasions WHEREAS
‘CT Head-Plain’ read with prescriptions of Yadav Hospital,
Dundahera, Haryana AND Bajaj Fracture Clinic & Nursing
Home, Old Gurgaon Road, Haryana reveal (i) Non-displaced
fractures of bilateral anterior parietal, right posterior parietal,
right squamous temporal and mastoid bones with sutural diastasis
of right lambdoid suture; (ii) Right posterior temporo-parietal
and aneterior left temporal subdural haemorrhages with multiple
foci of pneumocranium in the latter & (iii) Focal sub-arachnoid
haemorrhage in left frontal lobe.
27. No other document has been filed on record or relied in
evidence to show any other injury.
MEDICINES AND TREATMENT
28. PW-1 Rahul having relied upon (i) Aadhar Card & (ii)
copy of Mark-sheets of Secondary School Examination, 2015 has
fairly conceded that no Medical Bill has been filed along with
DAR.
29. He is, therefore, not entitled to any amount under the head
– Medicines & Treatment in the absence of Medical Bills/Retail
Invoices verifying expenses incurred on treatment.
CONVEYANCE AND SPECIAL DIET
30. Injured Rahul having suffered head injury, multiple
abrasions and fracture of both bone right leg in motor vehicle
accident on 30.05.2018 was shifted to Safdarjung Hospital, Delhi
AND continued to visit Yadav Hospital, Dundahera, Haryana till
06.06.2018. It is assumed that he might have used private
MACT No.695/2018 Rahul Vs. Rama Shankar Singh & Ors. Page No. 13 of 22
vehicle/hired taxi for visiting hospitals for post-operative
treatment & consultation. Accordingly, a sum of Rs.10,000/-
(Rupees Ten Thousand only) is awarded to injured towards
conveyance.
31. Similarly, injured Rahul must have also needed special diet
for full and complete recovery from head injury, multiple
abrasions and fracture of both bone right leg suffered in motor
vehicle accident. Another sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty
Thousand only) is therefore awarded to injured towards special
diet.
ATTENDANT CHARGES
32. It is assumed that injured Rahul having suffered head
injury, multiple abrasions and fracture of both bone right leg
might have needed an attendant to assist him for around three
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
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, a
sum of Rs.10,000/- x 3 = Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand
only) is awarded to injured towards attendant charges.
LOSS OF INCOME
33. PW-1 Rahul in para 5 of affidavit Ex.PW-1/A has deposed
about monthly income Rs.15,000/- by doing private work as
‘Plumber’ and ‘Supervisor’.
MACT No.695/2018 Rahul Vs. Rama Shankar Singh & Ors. Page No. 14 of 22
34. He was confronted with Para 56, Part VII of DAR apropos
‘Impact of the Accident on the Victim(s)’ and denied having
stated monthly income Rs.8000/- as mentioned in the DAR.
Since injured Rahul has passed Secondary School Examination,
2015 (Annual) so monthly income of injured in the absence of
cogent evidence is taken as per minimum wage of ‘Matriculate’
@ Rs.13,896/- applicable in Delhi w.e.f. 01.04.2018.
35. Having suffered head injury, multiple abrasions and
fracture of both bone right leg, it is assumed that injured Rahul
would have taken around three months to recover from grievous
injuries sustained in road accident. He is, therefore, awarded
Rs.13,896/- x 03 months = Rs.41,688/- (Rupees Forty One
Thousand Six Hundred & Eight Eight only) towards loss of
earning in course of recovery from fracture & grievous injury.
PAIN AND SUFFERING
36. 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.
37. 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
MACT No.695/2018 Rahul Vs. Rama Shankar Singh & Ors. Page No. 15 of 22
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.
38. Injured Rahul having suffered head injury, multiple
abrasions and fracture of both bone right leg in motor vehicle
accident was shifted to Safdarjung Hospital, Delhi on 30.05.2018
AND continued to visit Yadav Hospital, Dundahera, Haryana till
06.06.2018 for treatment. It would be apposite to award him a
sum of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand only) under the
head – ‘Pain & Suffering’.
LOSS OF AMENITIES, LOSS OF EXPECTATION OF
LIFE, LOSS OF FUTURE EARNING/PROSPECTS AND
FUTURE MEDICAL EXPENSES
39. Compensation for (i) loss of future earning/prospects AND
(ii) non pecuniary damages including loss of amenities and loss
of expectation of life is not required to be assessed in the absence
of serious injury resulting in permanent physical disability.
40. Break-up of compensation awarded to injured under
pecuniary and non-pecuniary heads is mentioned below in
tabulated form:
S. No. HEADS AMOUNT (in
Rupees)
1. Medicines & Treatment -
2. Conveyance Rs.10,000/-
3. Special Diet Rs.20,000/-
4. Attendant Charges Rs.30,000/-
5. Loss of Income Rs.41,688/-
6. Pain & Suffering Rs.30,000/-
TOTAL Rs.1,31,688/-
MACT No.695/2018 Rahul Vs. Rama Shankar Singh & Ors. Page No. 16 of 22
rounded off to
Rs.1,32,000/-
INTEREST
41. 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 Rahul is therefore awarded interest @ 7.5% per
annum upon award amount Rs.1,32,000/- (Rupees One Lakh &
Thirty Two Thousand only) from the date of filing of DAR on
03.08.2018 till notice of deposit under Order XXI Rule 1 CPC to
petitioner/counsel.
LIABILITY
42. R1/Rama Shankar Singh (driver) being principal
tortfeasor driving RTV Bus No.DL-1VA-9964 in rash and
negligent manner resulting in bodily injuries suffered by Rahul in
motor vehicle accident and R2/Pravesh Rana (owner) being
vicariously liable for the act of the driver are jointly and severally
liable to pay compensation amount with interest. However, since
RTV Bus No.DL-1VA-9964 was insured against Third Party Risk
so R3/United India Insurance Co. Ltd. being statutorily liable
under Section 149 (1) of M.V.Act shall pay compensation along
with interest to injured Rahul in the absence of any statutory
defence under section 149(2) of M.V. Act.
MACT No.695/2018 Rahul Vs. Rama Shankar Singh & Ors. Page No. 17 of 22
43. FINDING : Issue No.2 is decided accordingly by holding
that R3/United India Insurance Co. Ltd. shall pay the award
amount with interest to injured.
RELIEF
44. 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.1,32,000/- (Rupees One Lakh & Thirty
Two Thousand only) along with interest @ 7.5% p.a from the
date of filing of DAR on 03.08.2018 till notice of deposit under
Order XXI Rule 1 CPC is passed in favour of injured and against
all respondents.
45. The above-said compensation amount with interest shall be
paid to injured by R3/United India Insurance Co. Ltd.
46. FORM-IVB
SUMMARY OF THE COMPUTATION OF AWARD
AMOUNT IN INJURY CASE TO BE INCORPORATED IN
THE AWARD
1. Date of accident : 30.05.2018
2. Name of the injured : Rahul
3. Age of the injured : 19 Years
4. Occupation of the injured : ‘Plumber’ and ‘Supervisor’
5. Income of the injured : Rs.13,896/- (Minimum wage of
‘Matriculate’ applicable in
Delhi w.e.f. 01.04.2018)
6. Nature of injury : Grievous
7. Medical treatment taken : Safdarjung Hospital, Delhi &
Yadav Hospital, Dundahera,
Haryana.
MACT No.695/2018 Rahul Vs. Rama Shankar Singh & Ors. Page No. 18 of 22
8. Period of hospitalization : Nil
9. 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.10,000/-
(iii) Expenditure on special diet Rs.20,000/-
(iv) Cost of nursing/attendant Rs.30,000/-
(v) Cost of artificial limb -
(vi) Loss of earning capacity -
(vii) Loss of income Rs.41,688/-
(viii) 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 shock
(ii) Pain and suffering Rs.30,000/-
(iii) Loss of amenities of life -
(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 –
MACT No.695/2018 Rahul Vs. Rama Shankar Singh & Ors. Page No. 19 of 22
and nature of disability as
permanent or temporary
(Loss of amenities of loss of –
expectation of life span on account
of disability
(iii) Percentage of loss of earning –
capacity in relation to disability
(iv) Loss of future Income – (Income x –
% Earning Capacity x Multiplier)
14. TOTAL COMPENSATION Rs.1,31,688/-
rounded off to
Rs.1,32,000/-
15. INTEREST AWARDED
16. Interest amount up to the date of @ 7.5% p.a. from
award the date of filing
of DAR on
03.08.2018 till
notice of deposit
under Order XXI
Rule 1 CPC
17. Total amount including interest Rs.1,32,000/- +
interest @ 7.5%
p.a. from the date
of filing of DAR
on 03.08.2018 till
notice of deposit
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 25.08.2025
award.
MACT No.695/2018 Rahul Vs. Rama Shankar Singh & Ors. Page No. 20 of 22
47. The award amount shall be deposited by R3/United India
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 the 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.
48. Statement of injured Rahul 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
N Award Amount of FDR
o
1. Sh. Rahul Injured Rs.1,32,000/- Rs.1,32,000/ Nil
+ interest @ -with
7.5% p.a. from proportionate
the date of interest in
filing of DAR MACT
on 03.08.2018 Claims SB
till notice of Account of
deposit under injured
Order XXI
Rule 1 CPC
49. Injured has mentioned details of Savings Bank Account
No.4320371776 in SBI, District Court Complex Dwarka,
Sector-10, Dwarka, Delhi (IFSC Code: SBIN0011566) in his
statement recorded on 21.04.2025 and it is requested that award
amount may be transferred in the said SB Account.
MACT No.695/2018 Rahul Vs. Rama Shankar Singh & Ors. Page No. 21 of 22
50. Accordingly, Manager, State Bank of India, District
Courts Complex, Sector-10, Dwarka, New Delhi is directed to
transfer Rs.1,32,000/- with proportionate interest in SB Account
No.4320371776 in SBI, District Court Complex Dwarka,
Sector-10, Dwarka, Delhi (IFSC Code: SBIN0011566).
51. R3/United India Insurance Co. Ltd. shall inform the
injured/counsel regarding award amount being deposited in
MACT Account through registered post.
52. Copy of this award be sent to the Manager, SBI, District
Courts Complex, Sector-10, Dwarka, New Delhi for
information/compliance.
53. Dasti copy of award be given to Ld. Counsel for injured
and insurance company.
54. Ahlmad is directed to prepare separate miscellaneous file
to be listed on 25.08.2025 for filing compliance report.
55. File be consigned to the record room.
Digitally signed
Announced in the open Court TARUN by TARUN
YOGESH
on 21.07.2025 YOGESH Date: 2025.07.23
17:03:08 +0530
(Tarun Yogesh)
PO, MACT-01, Dwarka Courts,
New Delhi
MACT No.695/2018 Rahul Vs. Rama Shankar Singh & Ors. Page No. 22 of 22
[ad_1]
Source link