Delhi District Court
Kavita vs Dilshad Khan on 14 May, 2025
IN THE COURT OF MS. VRINDA KUMARI
PRESIDING OFFICER : MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS
TRIBUNAL, PATIALA HOUSE COURTS, NEW DELHI
IN THE MATTER OF:
KAVITA & ANR. VS. DILSHAD KHAN & ORS.
DAR No.320/18
1. Smt. Kavita (Married Daughter of deceased)
D/o Sh. Rattan Lal
W/o Sh. Sanjay Kumar
2. Smt. Geeta (Married Daughter of deceased)
D/o Sh. Rattan Lal
W/o Sh. Anil
Both R/o H.No. L-130, Dakshin Puri,
Dr. Ambedkar Nagar, South Delhi,
Delhi-110062.
......Claimants
Versus
1. Sh. Dilshad Khan (Driver)
S/o Sh. Ajeem Khan,
R/o Village Jurahari, PS Jurahara,
District Bharatpur, Rajasthan.
2. Sh. Subhash Chander (Owner)
S/o Sh. R.K. Sharma,
R/o 488, Kaimari Road, Old PLA,
Hisar, Haryana.
3. National Insurance Co. Ltd. (Insurer)
803A, Tower C, Connectus Building,
New Delhi.
.........Respondents
Date of filing of DAR : 16.05.2018
Date of framing of issues : 18.10.2018
Date of concluding arguments : 14.05.2025
Date of decision : 14.05.2025
DAR No. 320/18
Kavita & Anr. Vs. Dilshad Khan & Ors. 14.05.2025 Page 1 of 23
AWARD/JUDGMENT
1. The claim for compensation raised in the present
Detailed Accident Report (DAR) is in respect of fatal injuries
alleged to have been sustained by the deceased Smt. Maya in a
motor accident that took place on 13.12.2017, at about 11:50
AM, Outer Ring Road, Near Capital Court, Munrika, New Delhi,
regarding which FIR No.484/17, under Sections 279/304-A IPC
was registered at PS Vasant Vihar. The offending vehicle
involved in this case is a car bearing registration No.
HR-39D-9704, which at the relevant time of accident was being
driven by respondent no.1 (R1) Sh. Dilshad Khan, owned by
respondent no. 2 (R2) Sh. Subhash Chander and insured with
respondent no. 3 (R3) National Insurance Co. Ltd.
2. It is the case of the claimants that on 13.12.2017 at
about 11:50 AM, the deceased was going towards Sector-3, R.K.
Puram, New Delhi from Munrika on foot. When she reached near
Capital Court, Outer Ring Road, Munrika, New Delhi, the
offending vehicle i.e. Maruti Swift Dzire car bearing registration
No. HR-39D-9704, which was being driven by respondent no. 1
at a high speed and in a rash and negligent manner, came from
IIT Delhi and hit the deceased with great force due to which she
fell down on the road and sustained grievous injury. It is further
stated that the deceased was immediately removed to Safdarjung
Hospital, New Delhi where her MLC was prepared and she was
declared brought dead by the doctors.
3. Respondent nos. 1 and 2 filed their joint reply to the
DAR wherein it is submitted that respondent no. 1 was holding a
valid and effective driving license and the same was valid w.e.f.
DAR No. 320/18
Kavita & Anr. Vs. Dilshad Khan & Ors. 14.05.2025 Page 2 of 23
12.08.2016 to 21.08.2019 to drive commercial vehicles. It is
further submitted that the alleged offending vehicle was duly
insured with respondent no. 3 w.e.f. 28.03.2017 to 27.03.2018. It
is further submitted that the local police in connivance with the
claimants have falsely implicated the respondents as well as the
alleged offending vehicle in the present matter.
4. Respondent no. 3/Insurance Company filed its
response to the claim petition wherein it is submitted that the
alleged offending vehicle was duly insured with them in the
name of respondent no. 2 w.e.f. 28.03.2017 to 27.03.2018. It is
further submitted that the claimants were not financially
dependent upon the deceased as they were married and well
settled and hence, they are entitled to receive compensation only
to the tune of Rs.50,000/- under No Fault Liability.
5. On 18.10.2018, the following issues were framed by
this Tribunal :-
1. Whether Smt. Maya sustained fatal injuries
in the accident which occurred on 13.12.2017
at about 11:50 AM, Outer Ring Road, Near
Capital Court, Munrika, New Delhi caused by
rash and negligent driving of vehicle No.
HR-39D-9704 driven by respondent no. 1,
owned by respondent no. 2 and insured with
respondent no. 3 ? OPP.
2. Whether the petitioners are entitled for
compensation? If so, to what amount and from
whom? OPP.
3. Relief.
6. In support of their claim, the claimant no. 1 Smt.
Kavita, daughter of deceased examined herself as PW1. Her
DAR No. 320/18
Kavita & Anr. Vs. Dilshad Khan & Ors. 14.05.2025 Page 3 of 23
affidavit in evidence is Ex. PW1/A. She relied upon certain
documents. Copy of Aadhar card of deceased is Mark A. Copy of
her Aadhaar Card is Ex. PW1/1 (OSR). Copy of Aadhaar card of
claimant no. 2 is Ex. PW1/2 (OSR). Attested copy of DAR is Ex.
PW1/3 (colly).
7. Claimants examined Sh. Kuwar Singh, ASO DEMS
Deparment, MCD South Zone, Green Park, New Delhi as PW2
who has placed on record service book and salary slips of
deceased as Ex. PW2/1 (colly).
8. No witness was examined on behalf of respondents
in rebuttal.
9. The Tribunal heard the final arguments advanced by
Sh. A.K. Jha, Ld. Counsel for claimants, Sh.Manoj Goel, Ld.
Counsel for R-1 and R-2 and Sh. M.Z. Iqbal, Ld. Counsel for
R-3/Insurance Company and has carefully perused the entire case
record.
10. The findings on the aforementioned issues are
rendered hereinafter in the succeeding paragraphs.
11. ISSUE NO. 1
1. Whether Smt. Maya sustained fatal injuries
in the accident which occurred on 13.12.2017
at about 11:50 AM, Outer Ring Road, Near
Capital Court, Munrika, New Delhi caused by
rash and negligent driving of vehicle No.
HR-39D-9704 driven by respondent no. 1,
owned by respondent no. 2 and insured with
respondent no. 3 ? OPP.
12. Onus to prove this issue was upon the petitioners.
The first question that needs to be decided is whether the
DAR No. 320/18
Kavita & Anr. Vs. Dilshad Khan & Ors. 14.05.2025 Page 4 of 23
accident was caused by the vehicle bearing registration No.
HR-39D-9704.
13. In order to prove the same, the claimant no. 1 Smt.
Kavita has examined herself as PW1 who deposed in her
affidavit in evidence Ex. PW1/A as follows :-
“2. I say that Smt. Maya (since
deceased) was my mother, who met in a
road accident Near Capital Court, Outer
Ring Road, Munrika, PS Vasant Vihar,
New Delhi. On 13.12.2017, at about
11:50 am, my mother Smt. Maya was
going towards Sector-3, R.K. Puram,
New Delhi from Munrika on foot. When
she reached near Capital Court, Outer
Ring Road, Munrika, PS Vasant Vihar,
New Delhi, in the meanwhile a car
bearing registration No. HR-39D-9704
which was being driven by its driver, at a
very high speed, rashly, negligently,
without taking necessary precautions,
without proper lookouts, violating the
traffic rules and without blowing any
horn came from IIT Delhi and hit my
mother Smt. Maya with a great force. As
a result of this she fell down on the road
and sustained grievous injury. She was
immediately taken to Safdarjung
Hospital, New Delhi, where her MLC
No. 374857/2017 was prepared by the
doctor and declared her as ‘brought
dead’. Her postmortem was conducted at
Mortuary Vardhman Medical College &
Safdarjung Hospital, New Delhi vide
PMR No. 2160/17 dated 14.12.2017.”
14. During cross examination, she admitted that she was
not an eye witness to the accident.
15. DAR/chargesheet corroborates the assertions of
claimants.
16. During the course of final arguments, the mode and
manner of accident was not disputed by Ld. Counsel for
DAR No. 320/18
Kavita & Anr. Vs. Dilshad Khan & Ors. 14.05.2025 Page 5 of 23
Insurance Company.
17. Reliance is being placed upon the judgment of
Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case Bajaj Allianz General
Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Meera Devi & ors., 2021 LawSuit (Del)
2021 wherein it was held that
“……in view of Delhi Motor Accident Claim Tribunal Rules,
2008, contents of DAR has to be presumed to be correct and
read in evidence without formal proof of the same unless
proof to the contrary was produced.”
18. The Hon’ble Apex Court in Mangla Ram Vs.
Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. & Ors., 2018 Law Suit (SC) 303 has
observed that filing of charge sheet against the driver prima facie
points towards his complicity in driving the vehicle rashly and
negligently. It has been further observed that even when the
accused were to be acquitted in the criminal case, the same may
be of no effect on the assessment of the liability required in
respect of motor accident cases by the Tribunal.
19. It is well settled that the procedure followed for
proceedings conducted by an accident tribunal is similar to that
followed by a Civil Court and in Civil matters, the facts are
required to be established on preponderance of probabilities and
not beyond reasonable doubt, as are required in a criminal
prosecution. Reference in this regard is made to the judgment of
Hon’ble Apex Court reported as (2009) 13 SC 530 in Bimla Devi
and others Vs. Himachal Road Transport Corporation and others,
wherein it has been observed that strict proof of an accident
caused by a particular vehicle in a particular manner may not be
possible to be done by the petitioners and the petitioners were
merely to establish their case on the touchstone of preponderance
of probability.
DAR No. 320/18
Kavita & Anr. Vs. Dilshad Khan & Ors. 14.05.2025 Page 6 of 23
20. In view of foregoing discussion, it stands proved on
preponderance of probability that the aforesaid accident took
place due to rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle
bearing registration no. HR-39D-9704 and the said vehicle at that
time was driven by respondent no. 1, owned by respondent no. 2
and insured with respondent no. 3. Hence, this issue is decided in
favour of the claimants and against the respondents.
21. ISSUE NO. 2
Whether the petitioners are entitled for compensation?
If so, to what amount and from whom? OPP.
22. As rashness and negligence on part of driver of the
offending vehicle/respondent No. 1 has been proved, the
petitioners have become entitled to be compensated for death of
their family member in the said accident, but the computation of
compensation and liability to pay the same are required to be
decided. The compensation to which the petitioners are entitled
shall be under the heads as discussed hereinafter.
(i) Loss of dependency
23. I shall first consider the contention of Ld. Counsel
for Insurance Company that the claimants being married
daughters of the deceased cannot be considered as dependents. In
this regard, Ld. Counsel for Insurance Company has relied upon
the Judgment of Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in case titled as
Keith Rowe Vs. Prashant Sagar & Ors., MAC APP No.
601/2007, decided on 15.01.2010 as well as upon the Judgment
of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in case titled as Manjuri Bera
DAR No. 320/18
Kavita & Anr. Vs. Dilshad Khan & Ors. 14.05.2025 Page 7 of 23
Vs. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., II (2007) ACC 365 (SC).
24. In her affidavit in evidence Ex. PW1/A, PW1 has
deposed that the petitioners (claimants) were fully dependent
upon the income of their mother and her mother paid her entire
earning for household expenses.
25. During her cross examination, PW1 deposed that her
sister Geeta (claimant no. 2) stayed with her. She also deposed
that she stayed with her husband who worked as a daily wage
labourer and worked as and when he was called by anyone. She
also deposed that she did not stay with her in-laws. She has also
relied upon the Aadhaar cards of herself and claimant no. 2 to
show that they both stayed with their mother. No evidence in
rebuttal has been put forth by the Insurance Company.
26. It is apparent from record that the claimants belong
to the poor strata of society and were dependent upon the income
of their mother.
27. In Judgment dated 13.01.2020 in Civil Appeal Nos.
242-243 of 2020 (arising out of SLP (Civil) Nos. 976-977 of
2020) (Diary No. 47693 of 2018) titled as National Insurance Co.
Ltd. Vs. Birender & Ors., it was held by Hon’ble Supreme Court
of India as follows :-
“15. It is thus settled by now that the legal
representatives of the deceased have a right to apply
for compensation. Having said that, it must
necessarily follow that even the major married and
earning sons of the deceased being legal
representatives have a right to apply for
compensation and it would be the bounden duty of
the Tribunal to consider the application irrespective
of the fact whether the concerned legal
representative was fully dependant on the deceased
and not to limit the claim towards conventional
heads only. The evidence on record in the presentDAR No. 320/18
Kavita & Anr. Vs. Dilshad Khan & Ors. 14.05.2025 Page 8 of 23
case would suggest that the claimants were working
as agricultural labourers on contract basis and were
earning meagre income between Rs.1,00,000/ and
Rs.1,50,000/ per annum. In that sense, they were
largely dependant on the earning of their mother and
in fact, were staying with her, who met with an
accident at the young age of 48 years.”
28. In Judgment dated 18.10.2022 in MAC APP No.
433/2013 titled as Ram Charan & Ors. Vs. New India Assurance
Co. Ltd. & Ors., it has been held by Hon’ble High Court of Delhi
as follows :-
11. In this regard, parallels can be drawn from the
judgement passed by the Hon’ble Kerala High Court
in United India Insurance Co. Ltd v. Shalumol in
MACA No. 1768 of 2021. This case dealt with the
entitlement of married daughters and the parents of
the deceased to claim under the head of ‘Loss of
Dependency‟. It provides a more vocal stance on
the holding in Birender (Supra). The Hon’ble High
Court, while examining the contours of ‘Loss of
Dependency‟, had held the following :-
“48. The Madras High Court (through Justice S.
Manikumar, as he then was) in Branch Manager,
ICICI Lombard General Ins. Co Ltd. v.
Kaliyamoorthy and others [2018 KHC 5479 (2020)
11 SCC 356], while dealing with a case filed by the
parents and married sister, held thus:
“14.Even in the case of married daughters, a father
or mother or brother, can still monetarily help a
married daughter, depending upon the need or out of
love and affection. A mother can continuously
render her valuable service to her daughter, even if
the daughter is married. Similarly, a married
daughter NEUTRAL CITATION NO:
2022/DHC/004590 would still continue to assist her
mother, or father, in the case of need.
Contribution by means of service or income, both
can be taken into account to determine the quantum
of compensation. A married daughter is a legal
representative, as per the law of succession and that
she is entitled to make a claim and it is for the
Claims Tribunal or Court, to apportion the amount,
between the claimants, depending upon the loss ofDAR No. 320/18
Kavita & Anr. Vs. Dilshad Khan & Ors. 14.05.2025 Page 9 of 23
contribution suffered by the married daughter.”
50. It would be preposterous to accept the contention
of the learned counsel for the Appellant that a 25
year old daughter would be no longer dependent on
her 49 year old mother because she was given in
marriage. The bond between a mother and a
daughter is eternal. I reminisce the quotation of
Cardinal Mermillod ‒ “No matter how old she may
be, sometimes a girl just needs her mom.”
51. Even if dependency is a relevant criterion to
claim compensation for loss of dependency, it does
not mean financial dependency is the „ark of the
covenant‟. Dependency includes gratuitous service
dependency, physical dependency, emotional
dependency, psychological dependency, and so on
and so forth, which can never be equated in terms of
money”
29. In light of above discussions, it is held that the
claimants are entitled to compensation under the head of ‘loss of
dependency’.
30. The claimant no. 1 being daughter of the deceased
stepped into the witness box as PW1 and filed her evidence by
way of affidavit as Ex. PW1/A wherein she claimed that her
deceased mother was working as a Safai Karamchari in MCD,
South Zone, New Delhi and was getting salary of Rs.42,625/- per
month.
31. In order to prove the same, the claimants examined
Sh. Kuwar Singh, ASO DEMS Department, MCD South Zone,
Green Park, New Delhi as PW2 who has placed on record service
book and salary slips of deceased as Ex. PW2/1 (colly). He
deposed that as per salary slip, the salary of deceased was
Rs.41,718/- per month.
32. During cross examination, he deposed that no one
was compensated on compensatory ground from the DepartmentDAR No. 320/18
Kavita & Anr. Vs. Dilshad Khan & Ors. 14.05.2025 Page 10 of 23
nor any amount was paid to the family of deceased as a
compensation.
33. Perusal of salary slip of deceased reveals that the
deceased was working as Safai Karamchari with MCD and was
getting salary of Rs.41,718/- per month.
34. Now, I shall consider whether the allowances such
as TA, Washing Allowance, Cycle Allowance, Dirt Allowance
should be included as ‘income’ of the deceased for the purpose of
computation of loss of dependency.
35. In M/s IFFCO Tokio General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs.
Sushila Yadav & Ors. (MAC APP No. 726/2015 ; date of
decision 27.07.2017), it was held by Hon’ble High Court of
Delhi that allowances in the nature of Transport Allowance,
Washing Allowance, Metropolitian Allowance, Ration Money
and Conveyance Allowances were regular and to the benefit of
his family. They would result in corresponding savings and, thus,
the denial would be a net loss.
36. In Sebestiani Lakra & Ors. Vs. National Insurance
Co. Ltd. & Anr., (2019) 17 SCC 465, it was held that as far as
any amount paid under any Insurance Policy is concerned,
whatever is added to the estate of the deceased or his dependents
was not because of death of the deceased, but because of contract
entered into between the deceased and the insurance policy from
where he took out the policy. It was also held that the law was
well settled that the deductions can not be allowed from the
amount of compensation either on account of insurance or on
account of pensionary benefits or gratuity or grant of
employment to a kin of a deceased. It was further held asDAR No. 320/18
Kavita & Anr. Vs. Dilshad Khan & Ors. 14.05.2025 Page 11 of 23
follows :-
“12.The law is well settled that deductions can
not be allowed from the amount of compensation either
on account of insurance, or on account of pensionary
benefits or gratuity or grant of employment to a kin of
the deceased. The main reason is that all these amounts
are earned by the deceased on account of contractual
relations entered into by him with others. It cannot be
said that these amounts accrued to the dependents or the
legal heirs of the deceased on account of his death in a
motor vehicle accident. The claimants/dependents are
entitled to ‘just compensation’ under the Motor Vehicles
Act as a result of the death of the deceased in a motor
vehicle accident. Therefore, the natural corollary is that
the advantage which accrues to the estate of the
deceased or to his dependents as a result of some
contract or act which the deceased performed in his life
time cannot be said to be the outcome or result of the
death of the deceased even though these amounts may
go into the hands of the dependents only after his death.”
37. In Meenakshi Vs. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.
{arising out of Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) Diary No.
39746/2018}, it was held by Hon’ble Supreme Court of India
that HRA, flexible benefit plan and company contribution to PF
have to be included in the salary of the deceased. Reliance was
also placed upon the Judgment dated 11.07.2024 in National
Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Nalini & Ors. {Petition for Special Leave
to Appeal (C) No. 4230/2019}, wherein it was held that the
allowances under the head of TA (transport allowance), HRA, PF
loan, PF and special allowance ought to be added while
considering the basic salary of the victim/deceased to arrive at
dependency factor.
38. In Judgment dated 11.07.2024 in National Insurance
Co. Ltd. Vs. Nalini & Ors. {Petition for Special Leave to Appeal
(C) No. 4230/2019, the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India did not
DAR No. 320/18
Kavita & Anr. Vs. Dilshad Khan & Ors. 14.05.2025 Page 12 of 23
accept the contention of the Insurance Company that allowances
under the heads of Transport Allowance, HRA, PF Loan, PF,
SAF, Leave Encashment could not be added to the gross income
since they were personal in nature. It was reiterated that ‘income’
should include those benefits, either in terms of money or
otherwise, which are taken for the purpose of payment of income
tax or professional tax, although some elements thereof may, or
may not be taxable due to exemption conferred there upon under
the Statute. It was further held as follows :-
“3. It is apparent from the observations
made in the aforesaid decision that the
emoluments and the benefits accruing to
the deceased under various heads for the
purposes of computation of loss of
income, which are described by learned
counsel for the petitioner-Insurance
Company as personal to him to arrive at
the dependency factor, ought to be
included irrespective of whether they are
taxable or not.”
39. In National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Indira Srivastava
& Ors., AIR 2008 Supreme Court 845, it was held as under :-
“8. The term ‘income’ has different
connotations for different purposes. A
court of law, having regard to the change
in societal conditions must consider the
question not only having regard to pay
packet the employee carries home at the
end of the month but also other perks
which are beneficial to the members of
the entire family. Loss caused to the
family on a death of a near and dear one
can hardly be compensated on monetory
terms.”
40. In New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Charlie &
Anr., (2005) 10 SCC 720, it was held that net income would
ordinarily mean gross income minus the statutory deductions.
DAR No. 320/18
Kavita & Anr. Vs. Dilshad Khan & Ors. 14.05.2025 Page 13 of 23
41. In light of above discussed Judgments of Hon’ble
Supreme Court of India, the components of various allowances
such as TA, Washing Allowance, Dirt Allowance, Cycle
Allowance, HRA are included in the income of the deceased.
There is nothing to show that any income tax was deducted from
income of the deceased.
42. Accordingly, the income of deceased is taken as Rs.
41,718/- per month as no income tax was deducted in the salary
slips of deceased.
43. In order to prove the age of deceased, PW1 has
tendered on record copy of Aadhaar card of deceased as Ex.
Mark A, in which the year of birth is found recorded as 1958. As
per Ex. PW2/1, the date of birth of deceased is mentioned as
10.10.1958. Hence, the age of deceased as on the date of accident
i.e. on 13.12.2017 was 59 years, 2 months and 3 days.
44. Accordingly, in terms of law laid down by the
Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sarla Verma & Ors. Vs.
Delhi Transport Corporation & Anr., (2009) 6 SCC 121, which
has also been approved by the Constitution Bench of the Hon’ble
Apex Court in the case of National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs.
Pranay Sethi & Ors., (2017) 16 SCC 680, the multiplier of ‘9’ is
applicable in the present case.
45. The present claim petition has been filed by two
petitioners i.e. married daughters of deceased. Hence, in terms of
law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sarla
Verma & Ors. (Supra) and Pranay Sethi & Ors. (Supra), 1/3rd
earnings of deceased shall be deducted towards his personal and
living expenses.
DAR No. 320/18
Kavita & Anr. Vs. Dilshad Khan & Ors. 14.05.2025 Page 14 of 23
46. In view of the law laid down in the case of Pranay
Sethi & Ors. (Supra), the petitioners are also held entitled to
addition of 15% of earning of the deceased towards future
prospects as the employment of deceased was permanent in
nature. Thus, the loss of dependency in the present case comes to
Rs.34,54,250/- (rounded off) {(Rs.41,718/-X 12 X 9 X 2/3 X
115/100)}.
(ii) COMPENSATION UNDER NON-PECUNIARY HEADS
47. In terms of propositions of law laid down by the
Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of National Insurance Company
Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi (Supra), the petitioners are also held
entitled to amount of Rs.15,000/- each under the head of loss of
estate and funeral expenses, i.e. Rs.30,000/- under both heads.
Further, in view of Full Court judgment dated 30.06.2020 passed
by Hon’ble Apex Court in United India Insurance Co. Vs.
Satinder Kaur @ Satwinder Kaur & Ors. (2020) 06 SC CK 0036
(Civil Appeal Nos. 2705 and 2706 of 2020), the petitioners are
entitled to Rs.40,000/- each towards ‘loss of consortium’, in
addition to Rs.30,000/- granted under the conventional head of
‘loss of estate’ and ‘funeral expenses’.
48. Pertinently, the Hon’ble Apex Court has also held in
National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi (Supra) that
compensation awarded under the conventional heads shall be
enhanced at the rate of 10% in every three years and a period of 6
years since then stands already expired. Hence, the petitioners in
this case are also entitled to an increase @ 10% on the amount
awarded under the conventional head of ‘loss of estate’, ‘funeral
DAR No. 320/18
Kavita & Anr. Vs. Dilshad Khan & Ors. 14.05.2025 Page 15 of 23
charges’ and ‘loss of consortium’ after expiry of three years and
further 10% after expiry of another three years. The petitioners
are thus awarded a total sum of Rs.1,33,100/- [(Rs.40,000/- +
10% of Rs.40,000/-= Rs. 44,000/- + 10% of Rs. 44,000/- = Rs.
48,400/- X 2 = Rs.96,800/-) + (Rs. 30,000/- + 10% of
Rs.30,000/- = Rs.33,000/- + 10% of Rs. 33,000/- = Rs. 36,300/-)]
under this head.
ISSUE NO.3/RELIEF
49. In view of finding on issue number 2, the petitioners
are held entitled to a sum of Rs.35,87,350/- (Rupees Thirty Five
Lakh Eighty Seven Thousand Three Hundred Fifty only)
(Rs.34,54,250/- + Rs.1,33,100/-) along with interest @ 7.5% per
annum from the date of filing of DAR. However, it is directed
that the amount of interim award and interest for the suspended
period, if any, during the course of this inquiry, shall be liable to
be excluded from the award amount.
APPORTIONMENT
50. Out of the awarded amount, 50% amount each is
being awarded to petitioner no. 1 and 2, i.e. married daughters of
deceased.
RELEASE
51. Out of amount awarded to petitioner no. 1 and 2
each, 90% amount is directed to be kept with UCO Bank, Patiala
House Court, New Delhi in the Motor Accident Claims Annuity
Deposit (MACAD) in form of 150 monthly fixed deposit receipts
(FDRs) of equal amounts for a period of 1 to 150 months in
succession, as per scheme formulated by the Hon’ble Delhi High
DAR No. 320/18
Kavita & Anr. Vs. Dilshad Khan & Ors. 14.05.2025 Page 16 of 23
Court vide order dated 01.05.2018 in FAO No. 842/2003, titled
as Rajesh Tyagi & Ors. Vs. Jaibir Singh & Ors. and as
implemented vide subsequent order dated 07.12.2018 and order
dated 08.01.2021 passed in the said case. The amount of FDRs
on maturity would be released in their respective savings/MACT
Claims SB Accounts opened/to opened near the place of their
residence, as directed vide Order dated 16.05.2018 and the
remaining 10% amount is also directed to be released into their
above said accounts, which can be withdrawn through
withdrawal form and utilized by them.
52. The disbursement to the petitioners is, however,
subject to addition of future interest till deposit proportionately
and also deduction of proportionate tax on the interest amount or
amount of interim award, if any, to/from their shares.
53. The bank shall not permit any joint names to be
added in the savings bank accounts or MACAD scheme accounts
of petitioners i.e. the bank account of petitioners shall be
individual account and not a joint account.
54. The original fixed deposits shall be retained by the
UCO Bank, PHC, New Delhi in safe custody. However, the
statement containing FDR numbers, amounts, dates of maturity
and maturity amounts shall be furnished by the said bank to the
petitioners and the above amount shall be released in account of
petitioners by the Manager, UCO Bank, PHC, ND through
RTGS/NEFT/or any other electronic mode.
55. The monthly interest be credited by Electronic
Clearing System (ECS) in the saving bank accounts of the
petitioner(s) near the place of their residence.
DAR No. 320/18
Kavita & Anr. Vs. Dilshad Khan & Ors. 14.05.2025 Page 17 of 23
56. The maturity amount of the FDR (s) on monthly
basis net of TDS be credited by Electronic Clearing System
(ECS) in the above accounts of petitioners.
57. No loan, advance or withdrawal or pre-mature
discharge be allowed on the MACAD without permission of the
Court.
58. The concerned bank shall not issue any cheque book
and/or debit card to petitioner(s). However, in case the debit card
and/or cheque book have already been issued, bank shall cancel
the same before the disbursement of the award amount. The bank
shall debit card(s) freeze the account of the petitioner(s) so that
no debit card be issued in respect of the account of the
petitioner(s) from any other branch of the bank.
59. The bank shall make an endorsement on the
passbook of the petitioner(s) to the effect that no cheque book
and/or debit card have been issued and shall not be issued
without the permission of the Court and petitioner(s) shall
produce the passbook with the necessary endorsement before the
Court on the next date fixed for compliance.
60. It is clarified that the endorsement made by the bank
along with the duly signed and stamped by the bank official on
the passbook(s) of the petitioner(s) is sufficient compliance of
clause above.
LIABILITY
61. All the respondents are though being held jointly
and severally liable to pay the awarded amount of compensation
to petitioners, but respondent no.3 being insurer of offending
DAR No. 320/18
Kavita & Anr. Vs. Dilshad Khan & Ors. 14.05.2025 Page 18 of 23
vehicle, is directed to deposit the award amount with UCO Bank,
Patiala House Court Branch, along with interest @ 7.5% per
annum from the date of filing of DAR by RTGS/NEFT/IMPS in
bank account being maintained in the above said bank in name of
this tribunal within 30 days from today, failing which it is liable
to pay interest at the rate of 9% per annum for the period of
delay. In case even after lapse of 90 days from today, respondent
no. 3 fails to deposit this compensation with interest, in that
event, in light of judgment of the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi
passed in the case of New India Assurance Company Limited Vs.
Kashmiri Lal 2007 ACJ 688, this compensation shall be
recovered by attaching the bank account of respondent no. 3 with
a cost of Rs.5,000/-.
62. The respondent no. 3 shall inform the petitioners and
their counsels through registered post that the awarded amount
has been deposited so as to facilitate them to collect the same.
63. A copy of this award be given to the parties free of
cost or be sent to them by email. Ahlmad is directed to send a
copy of the award to Ld. Metropolitan Magistrate concerned and
Delhi Legal Services Authority in view of Judgment titled as
Rajesh Tyagi Vs. Jaibir Singh & Ors. passed in FAO
No.842/2003 dated 12.12.2014.
64. Further, Nazir is directed to maintain the record in
Form XVIII as per the directions given by the Hon’ble Delhi
High Court in the above case on 08.01.2021.
65. The particulars of Form-XVII of the Modified
Claims Tribunal Agreed Procedure, in terms of directions given
by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the above case on
DAR No. 320/18
Kavita & Anr. Vs. Dilshad Khan & Ors. 14.05.2025 Page 19 of 23
08.01.2021, are as under:
1. Date of the accident 13.12.2017
2. Date of filing of Form I- First N.A.
Accident Report (FAR)
3. Date of delivery of Form-II to the N.A.
victim(s)
4. Date of receipt of Form-III from N.A.
the Driver
5. Date of receipt of Form-IV from N.A.
the owner
6. Date of filing of the Form-V- N.A.
Interim Accident Report (IAR)
7. Date of receipt of Form-VIA and N.A.
Form VIB from the Victim (s)
8. Date of filing Form-VII-
of 16.05.2018
Detailed Accident Report (DAR)
9. Whether there was any delay or No
deficiency on the part of the
Investigating Officer? If so,
whether any action/direction
warranted?
10. Date of appointment of the Not given
Designated Officer by the Insurance
Company.
11. Whether the Designated Officer of No
the Insurance Company submitted
his report within 30 days of the
DAR?
12. Whether there was any delay or No
deficiencies on the part of the
Designated Officer of the
Insurance Company? If so, whether
any action/direction warranted?
13. Date of response of the Legal offer filed, but
petitioner(s) of the offer of the not accepted by the
Insurance Company. petitionersDAR No. 320/18
Kavita & Anr. Vs. Dilshad Khan & Ors. 14.05.2025 Page 20 of 23
14. Date of the award 14.05.2025
15. Whether the petitioner(s) were Yes
directed to open savings bank
account(s) near their place of
residence?
16. Date of order by which 16.05.2018
petitioner(s) were directed to open
savings bank account(s) near his
place of residence and produce
PAN Card and Adhaar Card and
the direction to the bank not issue
any cheque book/debit card to the
petitioner (s) and make an
endorsement to this effect on the
passbook(s).
17. Date on which the petitioner(s) Yet to furnish
produced the passbook of their
savings bank account near the
place of their residence along with
the endorsement, PAN Card and
Adhaar Card?
18. Permanent Residential Address of As mentioned above
the petitioner(s)
19. Whether the petitioner(s) savings Yet to furnish
bank account(s) is near his place of
residence?
20. Whether the petitioner(s) were Yes
examined at the time of passing of
the award to ascertain his/their
financial condition?
66. File be consigned to record room after compliance
of necessary formalities. Separate file be prepared for compliance
report and be put up on 18.08.2025. Digitally signed
VRINDA by VRINDA
KUMARI
KUMARI Date: 2025.05.14
16:52:43 +0530
Announced in the open court (Vrinda Kumari)
on 14.05.2025 PO/MACT, New Delhi
Encl: SUMMARY OF COMPUTATION OF AWARD
AMOUNT IN FORM XVDAR No. 320/18
Kavita & Anr. Vs. Dilshad Khan & Ors. 14.05.2025 Page 21 of 23
SUMMARY OF COMPUTATION OF AWARD AMOUNT IN
FORM XV
1. Date of accident 13.12.2017
2. Name of the deceased Smt. Maya
3. Age of the deceased 59 years, 2 months
and 3 days
4. Occupation of the deceased Safai Karamchari
5. Income of the deceased Rs.41,718/- per
month
6. Name, age and relationship of
legal representative of deceased :
Sl. No. Name Age Relation
i) Kavita 32 years Married
Daughter
ii) Geeta 26 years Married
Daughter
Sl. No. Head Amount Awarded
(Rs.)
7. Income of deceased (A) Rs. 41,718/-
8. Add : Future Prospects (B) Rs. 6,257.7/-
9. Less-Personal expenses of the Rs. 15,991.9/-
deceased (C)
10. Monthly loss of dependency Rs. 31,983.8/-
[(A+B) – C = D]
11. Annual loss of dependency Rs.3,83,805.6/-
(D x 12)
12. Multiplier 9
13. Total loss of dependency Rs.34,54,250/-
(D x 12 x E = F)
14. Medical Expenses (G) Nil
15. Compensation for loss of love Nil
and affection (H)
DAR No. 320/18
Kavita & Anr. Vs. Dilshad Khan & Ors. 14.05.2025 Page 22 of 23
16. Compensation for loss of Rs.96,800/-
consortium (I)
17. Compensation for loss of estate Rs.18,150/-
(J)
18. Compensation towards funeral Rs.18,150/-
expenses (K)
19. TOTAL COMPENSATION Rs.35,87,350/-
(F + G + H + I + J+K =L)
20. RATE OF INTEREST 7.5% pa from date of
AWARDED filing of DAR till the
date of award to be
deposited within 30
days and 9%
thereafter.
21. Interest amount up to the date of Rs.18,81,864/-
award (M)
22. Total amount including interest Rs.54,69,214/-
(L + M) (rounded off to
Rs.54,69,500/-)
23. Award amount released P-1=10% share
P-2=10% share
24. Award amount kept in FDRs/ P-1=90% share
MACAD P-2=90% share
25. Mode of disbursement of the Through Bank
award amount to petitioner(s)
26. Next date for compliance of the 18.08.2025
award
Digitally signed
VRINDA by VRINDA
KUMARI
KUMARI 16:52:50
Date: 2025.05.14
+0530
(Vrinda Kumari)
PO/MACT, New Delhi
14.05.2025
DAR No. 320/18
Kavita & Anr. Vs. Dilshad Khan & Ors. 14.05.2025 Page 23 of 23