Delhi District Court
Kuldeep Singh vs Yogesh Kumar And Ors on 17 December, 2024
IN THE COURT OF SHRI TARUN YOGESH
LD. PO-MACT-01, SOUTH-WEST DISTRICT,
DWARKA COURTS, NEW DELHI
MACT No. 1433/2017
CNR No. DLSW01-016762-2017
FIR No. 330/2017
PS: Rajendra Park, Gurugram
In the matter of :
1) Sh. Kuldeep Singh
S/o Sh. Sohan Lal
R/o 714, Rajokari Village,
South West Delhi,
New Delhi-110038. ... (Petitioner)
Versus
1) Sh.Yogesh Kumar
S/o Sh. Mewa Ram
R/o H. No.101, Vill-Mushedpur,
Tehsil-Farukh Nagar,
Distt: Gurugram, Haryana. ...(Driver)
2) Sh. Praveen
S/o Sh. Mewa Ram
R/o H. No.101, Vill-Mushedpur,
Tehsil-Farukh Nagar,
Distt: Gurugram, Haryana. ...(Owner)
3) Shriram General Insurance Co. Ltd.
Office at 202-203, 2nd Floor,
Suneja Tower-I,
Professor Joginder Singh Marg,
Janakpuri District Centre,
Janakpuri, New Delhi-110058. ....(InsuranceCompany)
... Respondents
(1) MACT No. 1433/2017 Kuldeep Singh Vs. Yogesh Kumar & Ors
(2) MACT No. 1434/2017 Anaro Devi Vs. Yogesh Kumar & Ors Page No. 1 of 20
Date of Institution : 08.12.2017
Date of Judgment : 17.12.2024
MACT No. 1434/2017
CNR No. DLSW01-016763-2017
FIR No. 330/2017
PS: Rajendra Park, Gurugram
In the matter of :
1) Smt. Anaro Devi
W/o Sh. Sohan Lal,
R/o 714, Rajokari Village,
South-West Delhi,
New Delhi-110038. ... (Petitioner)
Versus
1) Sh.Yogesh Kumar
S/o Sh. Mewa Ram
R/o H. No.101, Vill-Mushedpur,
Tehsil-Farukh Nagar,
Distt: Gurugram, Haryana. ...(Driver)
2) Sh. Praveen
S/o Sh. Mewa Ram
R/o H. No.101, Vill-Mushedpur,
Tehsil-Farukh Nagar,
Distt: Gurugram, Haryana. ...(Owner)
3) Shriram General Insurance Co. Ltd.
Office at 202-203, 2nd Floor,
Suneja Tower-I,
Professor Joginder Singh Marg,
Janakpuri District Centre,
Janakpuri, New Delhi-110058. ....(InsuranceCompany)
... Respondents
(1) MACT No. 1433/2017 Kuldeep Singh Vs. Yogesh Kumar & Ors
(2) MACT No. 1434/2017 Anaro Devi Vs. Yogesh Kumar & Ors Page No. 2 of 20
Date of Institution : 08.12.2017
Date of Judgment : 17.12.2024
AWAR D
Preface
1. Petitioners Kuldeep Singh and his mother Smt. Anaro Devi
have filed separate claim petitions seeking compensation for
bodily injury sustained in road accident.
2. Since both claim petitions arising out of FIR No.
330/2017, PS Rajendra Park, Gurugram, Haryana involve similar
question of fact and law so they are being disposed by this
common judgment.
Background
3. Facts of the case in a narrow conspectus are that Sh.
Kuldeep Singh driving motorcycle No.HR-26AJ-7962 along with
his mother riding the pillion on their way from SGT University,
Chandu Village to Rajokari Village, Delhi met with an accident
after their motorcycle was hit from behind by offending i10
Hyundai Car No.HR-26AY-3561 driven at very high speed in
rash and negligent manner near Petrol Pump Village Chandu,
Gurugram on 28.08.2017 at about 14:00 hours as a result of
which they fell down on the road and sustained bodily injury.
4. It is submitted that petitioners have suffered grievous
injuries in motor vehicle accident caused due to rash and
negligent driving of offending i10 Hyundai Car
No.HR-26AY-3561 and respondents being driver, owner and
insurer are jointly and severally liable to compensate them for
(1) MACT No. 1433/2017 Kuldeep Singh Vs. Yogesh Kumar & Ors
(2) MACT No. 1434/2017 Anaro Devi Vs. Yogesh Kumar & Ors Page No. 3 of 20
pecuniary and non-pecuniary damages suffered consequent to
grievous injuries sustained in road accident.
Defence
5. R1/Yogesh Kumar (driver) and R2/Praveen (owner) have
not filed any reply.
6. R3/Shri Ram General Insurance Co. Ltd. on its part has
filed reply mentioning Policy No.102015/31/18/003958 of
offending Hyundai i10 Car No.HR-26AY-3561 insured in the
name of Praveen from 14.06.2017 to 13.06.2018 besides
reserving its right to raise defence under section 147, 149, 157
along with all defences under section 170 of M.V. Act in case the
driver and owner would fail to contest the claim.
Inquiry
7. Following issues were settled on 31.10.2018 in MACT No.
1433/2017 titled Kuldeep Singh Vs. Yogesh Kumar & Ors. which
has been treated as leading case.
i. Whether Kuldeep Singh & Anaro Devi
sustained injuries in a motor vehicle accident
dt. 28.8.2017 due to rash and negligent
driving of vehicle no. HR-26AY-3561 being
driven by respondent no.1 Yogesh Kumar,
owned by respondent no.2 Parveen and
insured by respondent no.3 Shriram General
Insurance Co. Ltd.?
…. OPP
ii. Whether the petitioners in the above
mentioned cases are entitled to claim
compensation, if so, what amount and from
whom? … OPP
iii. Relief.
(1) MACT No. 1433/2017 Kuldeep Singh Vs. Yogesh Kumar & Ors
(2) MACT No. 1434/2017 Anaro Devi Vs. Yogesh Kumar & Ors Page No. 4 of 20
8. PW-1 Smt. Anaro Devi in paras 1 to 6 of affidavit Ex
PW1/A has inter alia deposed about – (i) fracture of head and
grievous injury sustained in road accident on 28.08.2017 at about
14:00 hours after motorcycle No.HR-26AJ-7962 was hit by
offending Hyundai i10 Car No.HR-26AY-3561 driven at high
speed in rash and negligent manner near Petrol Pump Chandu
Village, Gurugram as a result of which she along with her son
Kuldeep fell on the road; (ii) treatment for injuries at SGT
Hospital, Gurugram from 28.08.2017 to 05.09.2017, including
three days in ICU; (iii) expenses incurred on treatment,
conveyance, special diet and attendant charges; (iv) FIR No.
330/2017 under section 279/338 IPC registered at PS Rajendra
Park, Gurugram, Haryana AND (v) general and special damages
consequent to injuries sustained in road accident. She has also
relied upon following documents referred in her affidavit:
i. Copy of Discharge Summary along with Medical
Treatment Documents and Bills – Ex.PW-1/1
ii. Copy of Aadhar Card of deponent (Smt. Anaro Devi) –
Ex.PW-1/2
iii. Approval for Open Reduction Internal Fixation AND
Orbital Reconstruction for estimated cost of
Rs.1,75,000/- (Approximately) – Ex.PW-1/3
9. PW-2 Sh. Kuldeep Singh has deposed on similar lines in
para 2 of affidavit Ex.PW2/A apropos injury sustained in motor
vehicle accident after motorcycle No.HR-26AJ-7962 was hit by
offending Hyundai i10 Car No.HR-26AY-3561 driven at high
speed in rash and negligent manner near Petrol Pump Chandu
(1) MACT No. 1433/2017 Kuldeep Singh Vs. Yogesh Kumar & Ors
(2) MACT No. 1434/2017 Anaro Devi Vs. Yogesh Kumar & Ors Page No. 5 of 20
Village, Gurugram as a result of which he along with his mother
fell on the road and his mother was shifted to SGT Hospital,
Gurugram and remained hospitalized from 28.08.2017 to
05.09.2017.
10. PW-1 & PW-2 have been cross-examined by ld. counsel
for insurance company and petitioners’ evidence was closed on
11.10.2023.
11. No witness has been examined by the insurance company
and respondents’ evidence has been closed on 04.05.2024.
Discussion and Conclusion
12. Advocate Sh. S. K. Verma for injured and Advocate Ms.
Sunanda Nimisha and Sh. Surjan Singh for insurance company
have addressed their submissions.
13. I have carefully perused pleadings and evidence adduced
on judicial file. My issue wise finding is recorded below:
14. Issue No.1:
Whether Kuldeep Singh & Anaro Devi
sustained injuries in a motor vehicle accident
dt. 28.8.2017 due to rash and negligent
driving of vehicle no. HR-26AY-3561 being
driven by respondent no.1 Yogesh Kumar,
owned by respondent no.2 Parveen and
insured by respondent no.3 Shriram General
Insurance Co. Ltd?
…OPP
15. PW-1 Smt. Anaro Devi and PW-2 Sh. Kuldeep Singh in
para 2 of their affidavits Ex.PW-1/A and Ex.PW-2/A have
deposed about fracture of head and grievous injury suffered by
Smt. Anaro Devi in road accident after motorcycle
(1) MACT No. 1433/2017 Kuldeep Singh Vs. Yogesh Kumar & Ors
(2) MACT No. 1434/2017 Anaro Devi Vs. Yogesh Kumar & Ors Page No. 6 of 20
No.HR-26AJ-7962 driven by Kuldeep was hit by offending
Hyundai i10 Car No.HR-26AY-3561 driven at high speed in rash
and negligent manner near Petrol Pump Chandu Village,
Gurugram on 28.08.2017 at about 14:00 hours as a result of
which they fell on the road and Smt. Anaro Devi was taken to
SGT Hospital.
16. Their testimony remained consistent during cross-
examination by Ld. Counsel for insurance company and there is
no ground to disbelieve their depositions.
17. R1/Yogesh Kumar (driver) despite being indicted of rash
and negligent driving after conclusion of investigation has not
entered witness-box for disputing involvement of alleged
Hyundai i10 Car No.HR-26AY-3561 in motor vehicle accident
resulting in bodily injury sustained by Smt. Anaro Devi. Adverse
inference is therefore required to be raised against the driver as
per the 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 11th November, 2008.
18. FINDING : Issue No.1 is therefore decided in favour of
petitioners Smt. Anaro Devi and Sh. Kuldeep Singh by holding
that grievous head injury sustained by Smt. Anaro Devi in motor
vehicle accident was caused as a result of rash and negligent
driving of i10 Hyundai Car No.HR-26AY-3561 by R1/Yogesh
Kumar (driver) which vehicle was registered in the name of
(1) MACT No. 1433/2017 Kuldeep Singh Vs. Yogesh Kumar & Ors
(2) MACT No. 1434/2017 Anaro Devi Vs. Yogesh Kumar & Ors Page No. 7 of 20
R2/Praveen (owner) and insured with R3/Shri Ram General
Insurance Co. Ltd.
19. Issue No.2
Whether the petitioners in the above
mentioned cases are entitled to claim
compensation, if so, what amount and from
whom? … OPP
20. PW-1 Smt. Anaro Devi having sustained head injury in
motor vehicle accident was taken to SGT Hospital, Gurugram
and thereafter remained admitted at Medanta Hospital, Gurugram
from 28.08.2017 to 05.09.2017. She was also examined by the
Medical Board, Janak Puri Super Specialty Hospital and has been
assessed 53% permanent disability.
21. PW-2 Sh. Kuldeep Singh, on the other hand, has deposed
to have taken his mother to SGT Hospital, Gurugram where she
remained hospitalized from 28.08.2017 to 05.09.2017 and suffers
from acute pain in her head. He, nonetheless, has not adduced
any MLC/Treatment Record verifying injuries suffered upon his
person.
22. Quantum of compensation payable to injured has to be
assessed separately under pecuniary and non-pecuniary heads.
(Compensation assessed in MACT
No.1433/2017 titled KULDEEP SINGH VS.
YOGENDER KUMAR & ORS.)
NATURE AND EXTENT OF INJURIES
23. No Treatment Record has been adduced in evidence and
PW-2 Kuldeep Singh during cross-examination has fairly
(1) MACT No. 1433/2017 Kuldeep Singh Vs. Yogesh Kumar & Ors
(2) MACT No. 1434/2017 Anaro Devi Vs. Yogesh Kumar & Ors Page No. 8 of 20
conceded of having not filed any document verifying bodily
injury suffered by him. Following extract of cross-examination of
PW-2 being relevant is reproduced below:
“No MLC was prepared in my regard. I
visited the doctor regularly as I was suffering
from numbness after the accident. I have not
filed any document in this regard.”
COMPENSATION FOR PECUNIARY DAMAGES
INCLUDING MEDICINES, TREATMENT; CONVEYANCE,
SPECIAL DIET; ATTENDANT CHARGES AND LOSS OF
INCOME
24. PW-2 Sh. Kuldeep Singh has neither deposed about any
bodily injury nor about expenses incurred on medicine,
treatment, conveyance, special diet, attendant charges etc. He is,
therefore, not entitled to be compensated for pecuniary damage
in the absence of treatment record & medical bills verifying
bodily injury sustained in road accident.
LOSS OF AMENITIES, LOSS OF EXPECTATION OF LIFE,
LOSS OF FUTURE EARNING/PROSPECTS AND FUTURE
MEDICAL EXPENSES
25. 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 any treatment record & medical bills verifying bodily injury
sustained by Kuldeep Singh in road accident.
(1) MACT No. 1433/2017 Kuldeep Singh Vs. Yogesh Kumar & Ors
(2) MACT No. 1434/2017 Anaro Devi Vs. Yogesh Kumar & Ors Page No. 9 of 20
(Compensation assessed in MACT No.
1434/2017 titled ANARO DEVI VS.
YOGENDER KUMAR & ORS.)
NATURE AND EXTENT OF INJURIES
26. Discharge Summary of SGT Hospital, Gurugram records
‘Head Injury suffered in Road Traffic Accident’ at Chandu
Village, Gurugram on 28.08.2017 at around 2:00 pm whereas
Discharge Summary of Medanta Hospital, Gurugram reveals that
Smt. Anaro Devi admitted on 28.08.2017 was discharged on
05.09.2017 after undergoing treatment.
27. Application for directing Medical Superintendent, Janak
Puri Super Specialty Hospital, New Delhi to examine injured for
assessing physical disability consequent to injuries suffered in
road accident was allowed on 11.02.2020 and Disability
Certificate No.JSSHS/ PWD/2020/460 dated 28.09.2020 has
been received assessing 53% permanent disability.
MEDICINES AND TREATMENT
28. PWs 1 & 2 have deposed about Rs.1,30,761/- spent on
medicines and treatment of Smt. Anaro Devi. Treatment Record
referred as Ex.PW-1/1, on the other hand, reveals that (i) Bill
No.GHIPBL/18031704 for Rs.85,080.85/- for the period
28.08.2017 to 05.09.2017 AND (ii) Bill No.GHIPBL/19039262
for Rs.64,754/- for the period 17.09.2018 up to 22.09.2018 were
raised by Medanta Hospital, Gurugram which were paid by
ECHS, Gurgaon. Since expenses incurred on medicines &
treatment has been borne by ‘Ex-Servicemen Contributory
(1) MACT No. 1433/2017 Kuldeep Singh Vs. Yogesh Kumar & Ors
(2) MACT No. 1434/2017 Anaro Devi Vs. Yogesh Kumar & Ors Page No. 10 of 20
Health Scheme’ so injured is not entitled to be compensated for
pecuniary damage under the head – Medicines & Treatment.
CONVEYANCE AND SPECIAL DIET
29. Smt. Anaro Devi having sustained bodily injury in motor
vehicle accident on 28.08.2017 was taken on SGT Hospital,
Gurugram and thereafter remained admitted at Medanta Hospital
from 28.08.2017 to 05.09.2017 and thereafter form 17.09.2018 to
22.09.2018. Assuming that she might have used private
vehicle/taxi for visiting hospital, a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees
Ten Thousand only) is awarded towards conveyance. Similarly,
injured Smt. Anaro Devi might have needed special diet for full
and complete recovery from head injury. Another sum of
Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only) is therefore
awarded towards special diet.
ATTENDANT CHARGES
30. No bill and/or documentary proof has been filed on record
verifying expenses incurred on hiring attendant. Nevertheless, it
is assumed that injured Smt. Anaro Devi must have needed an
attendant to assist her for around 02 months even if such
gratuitous service was rendered by some or the other of her
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, injured Smt. Anaro Devi shall
(1) MACT No. 1433/2017 Kuldeep Singh Vs. Yogesh Kumar & Ors
(2) MACT No. 1434/2017 Anaro Devi Vs. Yogesh Kumar & Ors Page No. 11 of 20
be entitled to an amount of Rs. 8,000/- x 2 = Rs.16,000/- (Rupees
Sixteen Thousand only) towards attendant charges.
LOSS OF INCOME
31. Since Smt. Anaro Devi was more than 67 years old at the
time of accident so in the absence of evidence to the contrary,
value of gratuitous services above the age of 65 years is to be
treated as nil as per para 34 sub-para (v) of the judgment of
Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in Royal Sundram General
Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Master Manmeet Singh & Ors. MAC.
APP 590/2011.
PAIN AND SUFFERING
32. Following factors are to be taken into account for assessing
compensation under the head – Pain and Suffering:
(a) Nature of injury
(b) Parts of body where injuries occurred
(c) Surgeries, if any
(d) Confinement in hospital
(e) Duration of the treatment
33. Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in para 9 of Arvind
Kumar Mishra Vs. New India Assurance Co. Ltd. & Anr. (2010)
10 SCC 254 has observed that whole idea in case of assessment
of all damages for personal injury is to put the claimant in the
same position as he was insofar as money can. Perfect
compensation is hardly possible but one has to keep in mind that
the victim has done no wrong; he has suffered at the hands of
wrongdoer and Court must take care to give him full and fair
compensation for that he had suffered.
(1) MACT No. 1433/2017 Kuldeep Singh Vs. Yogesh Kumar & Ors
(2) MACT No. 1434/2017 Anaro Devi Vs. Yogesh Kumar & Ors Page No. 12 of 20
34. Injured Smt. Anaro Devi remained hospitalized at Medanta
Hospital, Gurugram from 28.08.2017 to 05.09.2017 and
thereafter form 17.09.2018 to 22.09.2018 for treatment of head
injury. She is, therefore, awarded a sum of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees
Thirty Thousand only) towards Pain & Suffering.
LOSS OF AMENITIES AND LIFE
35. Facts of the present case disclose that petitioner Smt.Anaro
Devi having suffered head injury has been diagnosed with low
vision, hard of hearing & chronic neurological condition for
assessing 53% permanent disability which is likely to affect her
overall health, quality of life and lifestyle. Hence, in the facts of
the present case and in view of law laid down in Rekha Jain Vs.
National Insurance Co. Ltd. (2013) 8 SCC 389, a sum of
Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) is awarded as
compensation towards loss of enjoyment of life and amenities.
LOSS OF FUTURE INCOME/PROSPECTS
36. Though low vision, hard of hearing & chronic neurological
condition has resulted in 53% permanent disability, however,
since value of gratuitous services of a home-maker above 65
years of age is to be treated as nil, in the absence of evidence to
the contrary, so petitioner Smt. Anaro Devi is not entitled to be
compensated for any loss of future income/prospects.
37. 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) MACT No. 1433/2017 Kuldeep Singh Vs. Yogesh Kumar & Ors
(2) MACT No. 1434/2017 Anaro Devi Vs. Yogesh Kumar & Ors Page No. 13 of 20
1. Medicines & Treatment –
2. Conveyance Rs.10,000/-
3. Special Diet Rs.20,000/-
4. Attendant Charges (Rs.8,000 x 2) Rs.16,000/-
5. Loss of Income –
6. Pain & Suffering Rs.30,000/-
7. Loss of amenities of life Rs.50,000/-
8. Mental & Physical Shock –
9 Loss of future income/prospect –
TOTAL Rs.1,26,000/- INTEREST
38. 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
award interest @ 7.5% per annum on the award amount as
granted by Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in National
Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Mannat Johar & Anr. (2019) 15 SCC 260.
Injured Smt. Anaro Devi is therefore awarded interest @ 7.5%
per annum upon award amount ₹1,26,000/- from the date of
filing of petition on 08.12.2017 till notice of deposit under Order
XXI Rule 1 CPC.
LIABILITY
39. R1/Yogesh Kumar (driver) being principal tortfeasor
responsible for motor vehicle accident resulting in head injury
suffered by Smt. Anaro Devi and R2/Praveen (owner) being
vicariously liable for the act of the driver are jointly and severally
liable to pay compensation along with interest. However, since
(1) MACT No. 1433/2017 Kuldeep Singh Vs. Yogesh Kumar & Ors
(2) MACT No. 1434/2017 Anaro Devi Vs. Yogesh Kumar & Ors Page No. 14 of 20
offending i10 Hyundai Car No.HR-26AY-3561 was insured
against Third Party Risk so, R3/Shri Ram General Insurance Co.
Ltd. being statutorily liable under Section 149 (1) of M. V. Act
shall pay the award amount along with interest to Smt. Anaro
Devi in the absence of any statutory defence under section 149(2)
of M.V. Act.
40. FINDING : Issue No.2 is decided accordingly by holding
that R3/Shri Ram General Insurance Co. Ltd. shall pay
compensation Rs.1,26,000 with interest to injured Smt. Anaro
Devi.
RELIEF
41. 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.1,26,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Twenty Six
Thousand only) along with interest @ 7.5% p.a from the date of
filing of petition on 08.12.2017 till notice of deposit under Order
XXI Rule 1 CPC is passed in favour of injured Smt. Anaro Devi
and against all respondents.
The above-said compensation amount with interest shall be
paid to injured by R3/Shri Ram General Insurance Co. Ltd.
42. FORM-IVB
SUMMARY OF THE COMPUTATION OF AWARD AMOUNT
IN INJURY CASE TO BE INCORPORATED IN THE AWARD
1. Date of accident : 28.08.2017
2. Name of the injured : Smt. Anaro Devi
3. Age of the injured : 74 years
(1) MACT No. 1433/2017 Kuldeep Singh Vs. Yogesh Kumar & Ors
(2) MACT No. 1434/2017 Anaro Devi Vs. Yogesh Kumar & Ors Page No. 15 of 20
4. Occupation of the injured : Housewife (aged 67 years) at
the time of accident
5. Income of the injured : Nil
6. Nature of injury : Grievous
7. Medical treatment taken : SGT Hospital & Medanta
Hospital, Gurgaon
8. Period of hospitalization : 28.08.2017 to 05.09.2017;
17.09.2018 to 22.09.2018
9. Whether any permanent : Yes.
disability? If yes, give details.
10. Computation of Compensation
S. Heads Awarded by the
No. 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 (8000 x 2) Rs.16,000/-
(v) Cost of artificial limb -
(vi) Loss of earning capacity Nil
(vii) Loss of income Nil
(viii) Any other loss which may require -
any special treatment or aid to the
injured for the rest of her life
12. Non-Pecuniary Loss:
(i) Compensation for mental and
physical shock
(ii) Pain and suffering Rs.30,000/-
(1) MACT No. 1433/2017 Kuldeep Singh Vs. Yogesh Kumar & Ors
(2) MACT No. 1434/2017 Anaro Devi Vs. Yogesh Kumar & Ors Page No. 16 of 20
(iii) Loss of amenities of life Rs.50,000/-
(iv) Disfiguration -
(v) Loss of marriage prospects -
(vi) Loss of earning, inconvenience, -
hardship, disappointment,
frustration, mental stress, dejectment
and unhappiness in future life etc.
13. Disability resulting in loss of earning capacity:
(i) Percentage of disability assessed and 53%
nature of disability as permanent or
temporary
(ii) Loss of amenities of loss of –
expectation of life span on account
of disability
(iii) Percentage of loss of earning Nil
capacity in relation to disability
(iv) Loss of future Income – (Income x –
% Earning Capacity x Multiplier)
14. TOTAL COMPENSATION Rs.1,26,000/-
15. INTEREST AWARDED
16. Interest amount up to the date of @ 7.5% p.a. from
award the date of filing
of petition i.e.
08.12.2017 till
notice of deposit
under Order XXI
Rule 1 CPC
17. Total amount including interest Rs.1,26,000/- +
interest @ 7.5%
p.a. from the date
of filing of the
petition i.e.
08.12.2017 till
notice of deposit
(1) MACT No. 1433/2017 Kuldeep Singh Vs. Yogesh Kumar & Ors
(2) MACT No. 1434/2017 Anaro Devi Vs. Yogesh Kumar & Ors Page No. 17 of 20
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 award By credit in the
amount to the claimant(s). SB Account of
the injured
21 Next Date for compliance of the 07.02.2025
award.
43. Award amount with interest in favour of Smt. Anaro Devi
shall be deposited by Shri Ram General Insurance Co. Ltd. in
Account No.42709452600 of MACT, South West, Dwarka
Courts, New Delhi at State Bank of India, District Court
Complex, Sector-10, Dwarka, New Delhi (IFSC Code
SBIN0011566 and MICR Code 110002483) through
RTGS/NEFT/IMPS within 30 days of award as per section
168(3) of M.V. Act under intimation to the Nazir of this court
with proof of notice to the petitioners and their counsel.
44. Statement of Smt. Anaro Devi regarding financial status,
needs and liabilities have been recorded. In view of their
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 Award Release Amount of
No Amount FDR
1. Smt. Injured Rs.1,26,000/- + Rs.1,26,000/- Nil.
Anaro interest @ 7.5% - with
(1) MACT No. 1433/2017 Kuldeep Singh Vs. Yogesh Kumar & Ors
(2) MACT No. 1434/2017 Anaro Devi Vs. Yogesh Kumar & Ors Page No. 18 of 20
Devi from the date of proportionate
filing of petition on interest in
08.12.2017 till MACT Claims
notice of deposit SB Account of
under Order XXI injured Smt.
Rule 1 CPC Anaro Devi
TOTAL Rs.1,26,000/- Rs.1,26,000/-
45. The above-said compensation shall be disbursed through
Motor Accident Claims Annuity Deposit Scheme (MACAD
Scheme) formulated vide Orders dated 01.05.2018 and
07.12.2018 passed by the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in FAO
No. 842/2013 (Rajesh Tyagi & Ors. Vs. Jaibir Singh & Ors.).
46. Smt. Anaro Devi has similarly mentioned details of SB
Account No.42902543713 with SBI Bank, Branch at Khera
Dabar, New Delhi (IFSC Code: SBIN0016737) in her statement
recorded on 24.07.2024 and it is requested that cash amount may
be transferred to the said SB Account.
47. Accordingly, Manager, State Bank of India, District Courts
Complex, Sector-10, Dwarka, New Delhi is directed to transfer
Rs.1,26,000/- with proportionate interest in SB Account
No.42902543713 with SBI Bank, Branch at Khera Dabar, New
Delhi (IFSC Code: SBIN0016737).
48. Shri Ram General Insurance Co. Ltd. shall inform both
petitioners and their counsel through registered post regarding
award amount being transferred/deposited in MACT Account so
as to facilitate petitioners to know about deposit of amount in
their respective accounts.
(1) MACT No. 1433/2017 Kuldeep Singh Vs. Yogesh Kumar & Ors
(2) MACT No. 1434/2017 Anaro Devi Vs. Yogesh Kumar & Ors Page No. 19 of 20
49. Copy of this award be sent to the concerned Manager, SBI,
District Courts Complex, Sector-10, Dwarka, New Delhi and
SBI Bank, Branch at Khera Dabar, New Delhi (IFSC Code:
SBIN0016737) for information/compliance.
50. Dasti copy of award be given to Ld. Counsel for
petitioners and Ld. Counsel for R3/Shri Ram General Insurance
Co. Ltd.
51. Ahlmad is directed to prepare separate miscellaneous file
to be listed on 07.02.2025 for filing compliance report.
52. File be consigned to the record room.
Digitally signed
Announced in the open Court TARUN by TARUN
YOGESH
on 17.12.2024
YOGESH Date: 2024.12.24
11:38:54 +0530
(Tarun Yogesh)
PO, MACT-01, Dwarka Courts,
New Delhi
(1) MACT No. 1433/2017 Kuldeep Singh Vs. Yogesh Kumar & Ors
(2) MACT No. 1434/2017 Anaro Devi Vs. Yogesh Kumar & Ors Page No. 20 of 20