Delhi District Court
Master Daksh S/O, Deceased Bhavna … vs Harpal on 22 April, 2025
DLCT010129162016
Presented on : 20-09-2016
Registered on : 21-09-2016
Decided on : 22-04-2025
Duration : 08 Years 07 Months
IN THE TRIBUNAL OF PRESIDING OFFICER-MACT-02,
CENTRAL, TIS HAZARI COURTS, DELHI
PRESIDED OVER BY DR. PANKAJ SHARMA
IN THE MATTER OF CASE / MACT No. 58321/16
(LEAD CASE) (For Grant of Compensation in respect of the
fatal injuries sustainedby the deceasaed Sh. Ramesh Chand
Sharma) :
1. RATNA SHARMA
W/o Late Sh. Ramesh Chand Sharma
2. GOPAL SHARMA
S/o Late Sh. Ramesh Chand Sharma
3. YAMINI SHARMA
D/o Late Sh. Ramesh Chand Sharma
R/o Gupta Apartments 006 & 007/149/9,
Kishan Garh, Near Vasant Kunj,
Delhi-110070. ....Petitioners
VERSUS
MACT No. 58321/16 Ratna Sharma & Ors. Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58322/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58323/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors. Page No. 1/48
Digitally signed
PANKAJ by PANKAJ
SHARMA
SHARMA Date: 2025.04.23
12:16:55 +0530
1. HARPAL
S/o Sh. Bani Singh
R/o Village Dudga, Pali,
Mukimpur, Aligarh, U.P. .(Driver).
2. OMBIR
S/o Sh. Devi Sahay
R/o Adarsh Colony,
Palwal, District Palwal,
Haryana. (Owner).
3. SHRIRAM GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.
1001, Ground Floor, Arya Samaj Road
Naiwala, Karol Bagh, Delhi-110005. (Insurer)
(Through Ld. Counsel Sh. S.K.Tyagi)
........Respondents
AND
DLCT010129182016
Presented on : 20-09-2016
Registered on : 21-09-2016
Decided on : 22-04-2025
Duration : 08 Years 07 Months
IN THE MATTER OF CASE/ MACT No. 58322/16 (For Grant
of Compensation in respect of the death of deceased Sh.
Mayur Sharma) :
MASTER DAKSH SHARMA
S/o Late Sh. Mayur Sharma
Through Natural Guardian
Smt. Ratna Sharma
W/o Late Sh. Ramesh Chand Sharma
R/o H.No. A-558/5, Shastri Nagar,
Delhi-110052. ….PetitionerVERSUS
MACT No. 58321/16 Ratna Sharma & Ors. Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58322/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58323/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors. Page No. 2/48
Digitally signed
PANKAJ by PANKAJ
SHARMA
SHARMA Date: 2025.04.23
12:17:00 +0530
1. HARPAL
S/o Sh. Bani Singh
R/o Village Dudga, Pali,
Mukimpur, Aligarh, U.P. .(Driver).
2. OMBIR
S/o Sh. Devi Sahay
R/o Adarsh Colony,
Palwal, District Palwal,
Haryana. (Owner).
3. SHRIRAM GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.
1001, Ground Floor, Arya Samaj Road
Naiwala, Karol Bagh, Delhi-110005. (Insurer)
(Through Ld. Counsel Sh. S.K.Tyagi)
……..Respondents
DLCT010129172016
Presented on : 20-09-2016
Registered on : 21-09-2016
Decided on : 22-04-2025
Duration : 08 Years 07 Months
IN THE MATTER OF CASE/ MACT No. 58323/16 (For Grant
of Compensation in respect of the death of deceased Smt.
Bhavna Sharma) :
MASTER DAKSH SHARMA
S/o Late Sh. Mayur Sharma
Through Natural Guardian
Smt. Ratna Sharma
W/o Late Sh. Ramesh Chand Sharma
R/o H.No. A-558/5, Shastri Nagar,
Delhi-110052. ….PetitionerVERSUS
MACT No. 58321/16 Ratna Sharma & Ors. Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58322/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58323/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors. Page No. 3/48
Digitally signed
PANKAJ by PANKAJ
SHARMA
SHARMA Date: 2025.04.23
12:17:03 +0530
1. HARPAL
S/o Sh. Bani Singh
R/o Village Dudga, Pali,
Mukimpur, Aligarh, U.P. .(Driver).
2. OMBIR
S/o Sh. Devi Sahay
R/o Adarsh Colony,
Palwal, District Palwal,
Haryana. (Owner).
3. SHRIRAM GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.
1001, Ground Floor, Arya Samaj Road
Naiwala, Karol Bagh, Delhi-110005. (Insurer)
(Through Ld. Counsel Sh. S.K.Tyagi)
……..Respondents
The particulars as per Form-XVII, Central Motor Vehicles
(fifth Amendment) Rules, 2022 (Pl. see Rule 150A) are as
under:-
1. Date of the accident 27/11/15
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 the N.A.
Driver
5. Date of receipt of Form-IV from the N.A.
Owner
6. Date of filing of the Form-V-Interim N.A.
Accident Report (IAR)
7. Date of receipt of Form-VIA and Form- N.A.
VIB from the Victim(s)
8. Date of filing of Form-VII – Detailed N.A.
Accident Report (DAR)
MACT No. 58321/16 Ratna Sharma & Ors. Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58322/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58323/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors. Page No. 4/48
Digitally signed by
PANKAJ PANKAJ SHARMA
SHARMA Date: 2025.04.23
12:17:06 +0530
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 Designated N.A.
Officer by the Insurance Company
11. Whether the Designated Officer of the N.A.
Insurance Company submitted his
report within 30 days of the DAR?
12. Whether there was any delay or N.A.
deficiency on the part of the Designated
officer of the Insurance Company? If
so, whether any action/ direction
warranted?
13. Date of response of the petitioner(s) to N.A.
the offer of the Insurance Company.
14. Date of the award 22/04/25
15. Whether the petitioner (s) was/were Yes
directed to open savings bank
account(s) near their place of
residence?
16. Date of order by which claimant(s) 23/11/24
was/were directed to open savings bank
account(s) near their 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
claimant(s) and make an endorsement
to this effect on the passbook.
17. Date on which the claimant(s) produced NA
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 the In MACT No.
MACT No. 58321/16 Ratna Sharma & Ors. Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58322/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58323/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors. Page No. 5/48
PANKAJ Digitally signed by
PANKAJ SHARMA
SHARMA 12:17:10 +0530
Date: 2025.04.23
Claimant(s). 58321/16
Gupta Apartments
006 & 007/149/9,
Kishan Garh,
Near Vasant Kunj,
Delhi-110070
In MACT No.
58322/16
H.No. A-558/5,
Shastri Nagar,
Delhi-110052
In MACT No.
58323/16
H.No. A-558/5,
Shastri Nagar,
Delhi-110052
19. Whether the claimant(s) savings bank NA
account(s) is near their place of
residence?
20. Whether the claimant(s) was/were NA
examined at the time of passing of the
award to ascertain his/their financial
condition?
COMMON AWARD/JUDGMENT
FACTUAL POSITION
1. These three petitions U/s 166 r/w Section 140 of
M.V. Act were filed on 21/09/2016. The first petition was filed
seeking compensation in respect of the death of one Sh. Ramesh
Chand Sharma S/o Sh. Ram Dutt Sharma (hereinafter referred to
as “deceased”), the second seeking compensation in respect of
the death of one Sh. Mayur Sharma S/o Late Sh. Ramesh Chand
MACT No. 58321/16 Ratna Sharma & Ors. Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58322/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58323/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors. Page No. 6/48
Digitally signed
PANKAJ by PANKAJ
SHARMA
SHARMA Date: 2025.04.23
12:17:13 +0530
Sharma (hereinafter referred to as “deceased”) and the third
seeking compensation in respect of the death of one Smt. Ratna
Sharma W/o Late Sh. Mayur Sharma (hereinafter referred to as
“deceased”) due to a motor vehicular accident dated 27/11/2015.
As per petition, on 27/11/2015 deceased Sh. Ramesh Chand
Sharma alongwith five other namely Late Mayur Sharma, Late
Bhawna Sharma, Late Sonia Sharma, Late Yahvi Sharma and
Maser Daksh were travelling from Delhi to Kosi Kalana (UP) by
road. It is further stated that deceased’s son Mayur Sharma was
driving the Hyundai Accent Car bearing registration no. DL-3C-
BR-3401 and the whole families were heading towards a family
marriage function in the evening. It is further stated that other
family members were travelling and following by another vehicel
bearing registration no. DL-12CH-1490 and everyone was lively
and happy for the function. It is further stated that as when they
were crossing Hodal, UP on GT Road, NH-2, suddenly a Truck
bearing registration no. HR-38Q-4263 (hereinafter referred to as
“offending vehicle”) which was on the opposite side of the road
driving rashly and negligently in speed cross the divider
pavement and crash into the Hyndai Accent Car. It is further
stated that due to the said accident all the persons inside the car
sustained severe injuries and later succumbed to death except two
years Master Daksh. It is further stated that due to accident by the
Truck Sh. Mayur Sharma who was driving the Hyundai Accent
Car died on spot and the other six persons namely Sh. Ramesh
Chand Sharma, Bhawna Sharma, Sonia Sharma, Yahvi Sharma
MACT No. 58321/16 Ratna Sharma & Ors. Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58322/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58323/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors. Page No. 7/48
Digitally signed by
PANKAJ PANKAJ SHARMA
SHARMA Date: 2025.04.23
12:17:16 +0530
and Daksh were rushed and taken to Kishansingh Hospital. It is
further stated that due to critical and sever injury Bhawna
Sharam and Sonia Sharma were brought dead and Yahvi Sharma
during treatment in Kishangarh Hospital succumbed to death and
Sh. Ramesh Chand Sharma and Daksh were so serious and grave
that the doctor advised them to admit in a better hospital and they
were later taken and admitted to Om Spero Hospital where they
died. It is further stated that the driver of the Truck bearing
registration no. HR-38Q-4263 Sh. Harpal ran away from the spot
leaving the Truck behind. It is further stated that the accident was
caused due to the rash and negligent driving of the R-1. An FIR
no. 655/15 PS Hodal, Distt. Palwal, UP, U/s 279/337/304A IPC
was registered in respect of the above accident. R-1 is the driver
of the offending vehicle. R-2 is the owner of the offending
vehicle and R-3 is the insurer of the same. Notice of this petition
was issued to all the respondents.
1.1 It is stated that the deceased Ramesh Chand Sharma
was 53 years of age and was self employed (Contractor). As per
petition, the petitioners were completely dependent on the
earnings of the deceased. Petitioners seek compensation to the
tune of Rs. One Crore Fifty Lakhs in respect of the untimely
death of deceased in the abovesaid accident.
1.2 It is stated that the deceased Sh. Mayur Sharma was
25 years of age and was self employed (Contractor). As per
MACT No. 58321/16 Ratna Sharma & Ors. Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58322/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58323/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors. Page No. 8/48 Digitally signed by PANKAJ PANKAJ SHARMA SHARMA Date: 2025.04.23 12:17:20 +0530 petition, the petitioner was completely dependent on the
earnings of the deceased. Petitioners seek compensation to the
tune of Rs. One Crore in respect of the untimely death of
deceased in the abovesaid accident.
1.3 It is stated that the deceased Smt. Bhavna Sharma
was 23 years of age and was housewife. As per petition, the
petitioner was completely dependent on the earnings of the
deceased. Petitioners seek compensation to the tune of Rs. Fifty
Lakhs in respect of the untimely death of deceased in the
abovesaid accident.
PLEADINGS IN CASE/ MACT No. 58321/16 (For Grant of
Compensation in respect of the fatal injuries sustained by the
deceasaed Sh. Ramesh Chand Sharma)
2. Respondents No. 1 and 2 were proceeded exparte.
3. R-3/Insurance Company filed a reply in which it
denied the contents of petition. However, it is admitted by R-3/
Insurance Company hat at the relevant time the offending vehicle
was covered by an insurance policy issued by itself in favour of
R-2.
PLEADINGS IN CASE/ MACT No. 58322/16 (For Grant of
Compensation in respect of the fatal injuries sustained by the
deceasaed Sh. Mayur Sharma)
4. Respondents No. 1 and 2 were proceeded exparte.
MACT No. 58321/16 Ratna Sharma & Ors. Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58322/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58323/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors. Page No. 9/48
PANKAJ Digitally signed by
PANKAJ SHARMA
SHARMA 12:17:23 +0530
Date: 2025.04.23
5. R-3/Insurance Company filed a reply in which it
denied the contents of petition. However, it is admitted by R-3/
Insurance Company hat at the relevant time the offending vehicle
was covered by an insurance policy issued by itself in favour of
R-2.
PLEADINGS IN CASE/ MACT No. 58323/16 (For Grant of
Compensation in respect of the fatal injuries sustained by the
deceasaed Smt. Bhavna Sharma)
6. Respondents No. 1 and 2 were proceeded exparte.
7. R-3/Insurance Company filed a reply in which it
denied the contents of petition. However, it is admitted by R-3/
Insurance Company hat at the relevant time the offending vehicle
was covered by an insurance policy issued by itself in favour of
R-2.
ISSUES IN CASE/ MACT No. 58321/16 (For Grant of
Compensation in respect of the fatal injuries sustained by the
deceasaed Sh. Ramesh Chand Sharma)
8. Vide order dated 22/10/2019 the following issues
were framed by the Ld. Predecessor of this Tribunal :-
(1) Whether the deceased Sh. Ramesh Chand
suffered fatal injuries in an accident that
took place on 27.11.2015 at about 11.00 PM
involving Truck bearing registration No.
HR-38Q-4263 driven by the Respondent No.
1 rashly and negligently and owned by the
MACT No. 58321/16 Ratna Sharma & Ors. Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58322/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58323/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors. Page No. 10/48
Digitally signed
by PANKAJ
PANKAJ SHARMA
SHARMA Date:
2025.04.23
12:17:27 +0530
Respondent No. 2 and insured with the
Respondent No.3?OPP(2) Whether the Petitioners are entitled for
compensation? If so, to what amount and
from whom?
(3) Relief.
ISSUES IN CASE/ MACT No. 58322/16 (For Grant of
Compensation in respect of the fatal injuries sustained by
the deceasaed Sh. Mayur Sharma)
9. Vide order dated 22/10/2019 the following issues
were framed by the Ld. Predecessor of this Tribunal :-
(1) Whether the deceased Sh. Mayur Sharma
suffered fatal injuries in an accident that
took place on 27.11.2015 at about 11.00 PM
involving Truck bearing registration No.
HR-38Q-4263 driven by the Respondent No.
1 rashly and negligently and owned by the
Respondent No. 2 and insured with the
Respondent No.3?OPP(2) Whether the Petitioner is entitled for
compensation? If so, to what amount and
from whom?
(3) Relief.
ISSUES IN CASE/ MACT No. 58323/16 (For Grant of Co
mpensation in respect of the fatal injuries sustained by the
deceasaed Smt. Bhawna Sharma)
10. Vide order dated 22/10/2019 the following issues
were framed by the Ld. Predecessor of this Tribunal :-
(1) Whether the deceased Smt. Bhavna
Sharma suffered fatal injuries in an accident
MACT No. 58321/16 Ratna Sharma & Ors. Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58322/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58323/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors. Page No. 11/48
Digitally signed
PANKAJ by PANKAJ
SHARMA
SHARMA 12:17:30
Date: 2025.04.23
+0530
that took place on 27.11.2015 at about 11.00
PM involving Truck bearing registration No.
HR-38Q-4263 driven by the Respondent No.
1 rashly and negligently and owned by the
Respondent No. 2 and insured with the
Respondent No.3?OPP
(2) Whether the Petitioner is entitled for
compensation? If so, to what amount and
from whom?
(3) Relief.
EVIDENCE IN CASE NO. 58321/16 (FOR GRANT OF
COMPENSATION IN RESPECT OF THE DEATH OF
DECEASED SH. RAMESH CHAND SHARMA):
11. In support of their contentions, the Petitioners examined
Petitioner No.1 Smt. Ratna Sharma, wife of the deceased, in
lead case bearing MACT No. 58321/16 as PW-1. PW-1 deposed,
vide her affidavit Ex. PW-1/A that the deceased was her husband
who lost his life on 27/11/2015 due to the motor vehicular
accident dated 27/11/2015 as mentioned in Para No. 1 of this
award. She further stated that at the relevant time, the deceased
Sh. Ramesh Chand Sharma was aged about 53 years and was self
employed (Contractor). She further deposed that the deceased is
survived by his wife (PW-1), and one son and one daughter. She
has relied upon following documents in support of her claim :-
“Ex. PW-1/1 (Colly) is the certified copy of
chargesheet, FIR and ID Proof;
Mark A is copy of ITR of deceased and other
relevant documents”
MACT No. 58321/16 Ratna Sharma & Ors. Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58322/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58323/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors. Page No. 12/48
Digitally signed
PANKAJ by PANKAJ
SHARMA
SHARMA Date: 2025.04.23
12:17:34 +0530
11.1 She was cross-examined by Ld. Counsel for R-3/
Insurance Company.. In her cross-examination she deposed that
she is a home maker and she is not the eye witness to the
accident in question. She denied the suggestion that her grandson
necessarily be made party in this petition. She further denied the
suggestion that she is intentionally not providing any information
regarding the CA or the income of her husband through some
other sources. She further denied the suggestion that she is trying
to avoid providing the computation sheet which is prepared by
the CA before filing of ITR.
11.2 PE was then closed.
12. R-3/ Insurance Company examined one Sh. Ashok
Kumar Sharma, Assistant Manager with Shri Ram General
Insurance Company Ltd as R3W1. He relied upon the following
documents:-
”Ex.R3W1/1 is copy of insurance policy;
Ex.R3W1/2 is copy of notice under order XII rule 8
CPC;
Ex.R3W1/3 and Ex.R3W1/4 are postal receipts;
Ex.R3W1/5 are speed post tracking reports;
Ex.R3W1/6 is undelivered envelop.”
12.1 R3W1 was not cross-examined.
MACT No. 58321/16 Ratna Sharma & Ors. Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58322/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58323/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors. Page No. 13/48
PANKAJ Digitally signed by
PANKAJ SHARMASHARMA 12:17:39 +0530
Date: 2025.04.23
EVIDENCE IN CASE NO. 58322/16 (FOR GRANT OF
COMPENSATION IN RESPECT OF THE DEATH OF
DECEASED SH. MAYUR SHARMA):
13. In support of his contentions, the Petitioner examined
one Smt. Ratna Sharma, who is mother of the deceased, in the
case bearing MACT No. 58322/16 as PW-1. PW-1 deposed, vide
her affidavit Ex. PW1/A that the deceased was her son who lost
his life on 27/11/2015 due to the motor vehicular accident dated
27/11/2015 as mentioned in Para No. 1 of this award. She further
stated that at the relevant time, the deceased Sh. Mayur Sharma
was aged about 25 years and was self employed (Contractor).
She further deposed that the deceased is survived by his son. She
has relied upon following documents in support of her claim :-
“Ex. PW-1/1 (Colly) is the copy of FIR and
chargesheet;
Mark A is copy of ITR of deceased Mayur
Sharma for the Assessment Year 2015-16 ”
13.1 She was cross-examined by Ld. Counsel for R-3/
Insurance Company.. In her cross-examination she deposed that
she is a homemaker and she is not the eye witness to the accident in
question.
13.2 PE was then closed.
MACT No. 58321/16 Ratna Sharma & Ors. Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58322/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58323/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors. Page No. 14/48
Digitally signed
PANKAJ by PANKAJ
SHARMA
SHARMA Date: 2025.04.23
12:17:43 +0530
14. R-3/ Insurance Company examined one Sh. Ashok
Kumar Sharma, Assistant Manager with Shri Ram General
Insurance Company Ltd as R3W1. He relied upon the following
documents:
”Ex.R3W1/1 is copy of insurance policy;
Ex.R3W1/2 is copy of notice under order XII rule 8
CPC;
Ex.R3W1/3 and Ex.R3W1/4 are postal receipts;
Ex.R3W1/5 are speed post tracking reports;
Ex.R3W1/6 is undelivered envelop.”
14.1 R3W1 was not cross-examined.
EVIDENCE IN CASE NO. 58323/16 (FOR GRANT OF
COMPENSATION IN RESPECT OF THE DEATH OF
DECEASED SMT. BHAVNA SHARMA):
15. In support of his contentions, the Petitioner examined
one Smt. Ratna Sharma, who is mother-in-law of the deceased,
in the case bearing MACT No. 58323/16 as PW-1. PW-1
deposed, vide her affidavit Ex. PW1/A that the deceased was her
daughter-in-law who lost her life on 27/11/2015 due to the motor
vehicular accident dated 27/11/2015 as mentioned in Para No. 1
of this award. She further stated that at the relevant time, the
deceased Smt. Bhavna Sharma was aged about 23 years and was
house-wife. She further deposed that the deceased is survived by
her son. She has relied upon following documents in support of
her claim :-
MACT No. 58321/16 Ratna Sharma & Ors. Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58322/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58323/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors. Page No. 15/48
Digitally
signed by
PANKAJ
PANKAJ SHARMA
SHARMA Date:
2025.04.23
12:17:48
+0530
“Ex. PW-1/1 (Colly) is the copy of FIR and
chargesheet.”15.1 She was cross-examined by Ld. Counsel for R-3/
Insurance Company. In her cross-examination she deposed that
she is a home maker and she is not the eye witness to the accident in
question.
15.2 PE was then closed.
16. R-3/ Insurance Company examined one Sh. Ashok
Kumar Sharma, Assistant Manager with Shri Ram General
Insurance Company Ltd as R3W1. He relied upon the following
documents:-
”Ex.R3W1/1 is copy of insurance policy;
Ex.R3W1/2 is copy of notice under order XII rule 8
CPC;
Ex.R3W1/3 and Ex.R3W1/4 are postal receipts;
Ex.R3W1/5 are speed post tracking reports;
Ex.R3W1/6 is undelivered envelop.”
16.1 R3W1 was not cross-examined.
CONSOLIDATION OF CASES
17. All the above matters were consolidated vide order dated
08/04/2025 and the matter for Grant of Compensation in respectMACT No. 58321/16 Ratna Sharma & Ors. Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58322/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58323/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors. Page No. 16/48
Digitally signed
PANKAJ by PANKAJ
SHARMA
SHARMA Date: 2025.04.23
12:17:51 +0530
of the fatal injuries sustained by deceased Sh. Ramesh Chand
Sharma i.e. MACT No. 58321/16 was treated as a ‘Lead case”.
FINDINGS
18. Oral submissions were advanced by Ld. Counsel for
the parties.
19. I have perused the record and my issue wise findings
are as under:-
ISSUE NO. 1 IN CASE/ MACT No. 58321/16 (For
Grant of Compensation in respect of the fatal injuries
sustained by the deceasaed Sh. Ramesh Chand Sharma)
“hether the deceased Sh. Ramesh Chand
suffered fatal injuries in an accident that too
k place on 27.11.2015 at about 11.00 PM
involving Truck bearing registration No. HR-
38Q-4263 driven by the Respondent No. 1
rashly and negligently and owned by the
Respondent No. 2 and insured with the
Respondent No.3?OPP’ISSUE NO. 1 IN CASE/ MACT No. 58322/16 (For Grant of
Compensation in respect of the fatal injuries sustained by the
deceasaed Sh. Mayur Sharma)
“Whether the deceased Sh. Mayur Sharma
suffered fatal injuries in an accident that too
k place on 27.11.2015 at about 11.00 PM
involving Truck bearing registration No. HR-
38Q-4263 driven by the Respondent No. 1
rashly and negligently and owned by the Res
pondent No. 2 and insured with the
Respondent No.3?OPP”
MACT No. 58321/16 Ratna Sharma & Ors. Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58322/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58323/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors. Page No. 17/48
Digitally signed by
PANKAJ PANKAJ SHARMA
SHARMA Date: 2025.04.23
12:17:57 +0530
ISSUE NO. 1 IN CASE/ MACT No. 58323/16 (For Grant of
Compensation in respect of the fatal injuries sustained by the
deceasaed Smt. Bhavna Sharma)
“Whether the deceased Smt. Bhavna Sharma
suffered fatal injuries in an accident that
took place on 27.11.2015 at about 11.00 PM
involving Truck bearing registration No. HR-
38Q-4263 driven by the Respondent No. 1
rashly and negligently and owned by the
Respondent No. 2 and insured with the
Respondent No.3?OPPOPP”
20. At the very outset, it may be noted 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 by preponderance
of probabilities only and not by strict rules of evidence or beyond
reasonable doubts, as are required in a criminal prosecution. The
burden of proof in a civil case is never as heavy as in a criminal
case, but in a claim petition under the M.V. Act, this burden is
infact even lesser than that in a civil case. Reference in this
regard can be made to the prepositions of law laid down by the
Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Bimla Devi and others Vs.
Himachal Road Transport Corporation and others, reported in
(2009) 13 SC 530, which were reiterated in the subsequent
judgment in the case of Parmeshwari Vs. Amir Chand and others
2011 (1) SCR 1096(Civil Appeal No.1082 of 2011) and also
recently in another case Mangla Ram Vs. Oriental Insurance Co.
Ltd. & Ors., 2018 Law Suit (SC) 303 etc.
MACT No. 58321/16 Ratna Sharma & Ors. Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58322/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58323/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors. Page No. 18/48
Digitally signed by
PANKAJ PANKAJ SHARMA
SHARMA Date: 2025.04.23
12:18:01 +0530
21. In order to prove the present issue, the petitioners in
all the matters examined Smt. Ratna Sharma, who is wife of the
deceased in the lead case bearing MACT No. 58321/16 and
Grandmother/ Guardian of the petitioner/s in the connected cases
bearing MACT No. 58322/16 and 58323/16 as PWs-1. PWs-1
has clearly and categorically deposed in all the cases that at the
relevant date, time and place time, deceased Sh. Ramesh Chand
Sharma alongwith five other namely Late Mayur Sharma, Late
Bhawna Sharma, Late Sonia Sharma, Late Yahvi Sharma and
Maser Daksh were travelling from Delhi to Kosi Kalana (UP) by
road. It is further stated that deceased’s son Mayur Sharma was
driving the Hyundai Accent Car bearing registration no. DL-3C-
BR-3401 and the whole families were heading towards a family
marriage function in the evening. It is further stated that other
family members were travelling and following by another vehicle
bearing registration no. DL-12CH-1490 and everyone was lively
and happy for the function. It is further stated that as when they
were crossing Hodal, UP on GT Road, NH-2, suddenly a Truck
bearing registration no. HR-38Q-4263 (hereinafter referred to as
“offending vehicle”) which was on the opposite side of the road
driving rashly and negligently in speed cross the divider
pavement and crash into the Hyndai Accent Car. It is further
stated that due to the said accident all the persons inside the car
sustained severe injuries and later succumbed to death except two
years Master Daksh. It is further stated that due to accident by the
MACT No. 58321/16 Ratna Sharma & Ors. Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58322/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58323/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors. Page No. 19/48
Digitally signed
PANKAJ by PANKAJ
SHARMA
SHARMA Date: 2025.04.23
12:18:04 +0530
Truck Sh. Mayur Sharma who was driving the Hyundai Accent
Car died on spot and the other six persons namely Sh. Ramesh
Chand Sharma, Bhawna Sharma, Sonia Sharma, Yahvi Sharma
and Daksh were rushed and taken to Kishansingh Hospital. It is
further stated that due to critical and sever injury Bhawna
Sharam and Sonia Sharma were brought dead and Yahvi Sharma
during treatment in Kishangarh Hospital succumbed to death and
Sh. Ramesh Chand Sharma and Daksh were so serious and grave
that the doctor advised them to admit in a better hospital and they
were later taken and admitted to Om Spero Hospital where they
died. It is further stated that the driver of the Truck bearing
registration no. HR-38Q-4263 Sh. Harpal ran away from the spot
leaving the Truck behind. It is further stated that the accident was
caused due to the rash and negligent driving of the R-1. PW-1
was cross-examined by Ld. Counsel for R-3/ Insurance Company
and PW-1 has been able to respond all the queries of R-3/
Insurance Company. In totality, it could be safely observed here
that PW-1 withstood the test of cross examination as they have
not betrayed any signs of falsity or inconsistency and therefore,
their testimonies are worth acting upon.
22. The very fact that R-1 has already been charge-
sheeted for the offences punishable under Sections
279/338/304A IPC & 181, 184, 185, 102, 192, 192क 196 of
MV Act in the above criminal case/FIR in itself is a strong
circumstance to support the above oral testimony of PWs-1 and
MACT No. 58321/16 Ratna Sharma & Ors. Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58322/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58323/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors. Page No. 20/48
Digitally signed
PANKAJ by PANKAJ
SHARMA
SHARMA Date: 2025.04.23
12:18:08 +0530
the case of petitioners on these issues. The certified copies of
FIR and Chargesheet, and Postmortem Reports of deceased also
corroborate the oral testimonies of PWs-1.
23. Besides the above, R-1 himself was the best witness
who could have stepped into the witness box to challenge the
deposition being made by PWs-1 regarding the above accident
and its manner etc., but he has not done so. Therefore, an
adverse inference on this aspect is also required to be drawn
against the respondents in view of the law laid down in case of
Cholamandalam M.S. General Insurance Company Ltd. Vs.
Kamlesh, reported in 2009 (3) AD (Delhi) 310.
24. In view of the above, it could be safely assumed that
at the relevant time the offending vehicle was being driven by
R-1 in a rash and negligent manner.
25. This Tribunal now proceeds to assess the wrongful
act, neglect or default of R-1, if any, in driving the offending
vehicle at the relevant time. Admittedly, R-1 has not explained
the circumstances under which his vehicle (i.e. the offending
vehicle) hit the vehicle in which the deceased persons were
travelling at the relevant time. In the absence of any averment or
evidence regarding any mechanical defect in the offending
vehicle or any material depicting any negligent/sudden act or
omission on the part of the deceased as well as injured persons,
MACT No. 58321/16 Ratna Sharma & Ors. Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58322/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58323/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors. Page No. 21/48
Digitally signed by
PANKAJ PANKAJ SHARMA
SHARMA Date: 2025.04.23
12:18:12 +0530
the only inference possible in the given facts and circumstances
is that of neglect and default on the part of R-1 in driving the
offending vehicle at the relevant time.
26. In view of the Postmortem Report/ medical records
placed on the judicial files by the respective petitioners, no
dispute is left regarding the death of the deceased persons in the
above accident.
27. In view of the above discussion, this Tribunal holds
that the deceased persons died on account of neglect and default
of R-1 while driving the offending vehicle at the relevant time.
In all these issues are thus decided against the respondents and
in favour of the petitioner/s in both the above cases.
ISSUE NO. 2 ( IN ALL THE THREE CASES)
28. As this Tribunal has already held that R1 was
responsible for the fatal injuries sustained by the deceased
persons, therefore, the petitioners in both the cases are entitled
to be compensated justly. Computation of the compensation
shall be decided separately for both the sets of petitioners in the
following paragraphs :-
COMPENSATION IN CASE NO. 58321/16 (For Grant of
Compensation in respect of the death of deceased Sh. Ramesh
Chand Sharma) :
MACT No. 58321/16 Ratna Sharma & Ors. Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58322/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58323/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors. Page No. 22/48
PANKAJ Digitally signed by
PANKAJ SHARMA
SHARMA Date: 2025.04.23
12:18:16 +0530
29. The compensation to which the petitioners are
entitled shall be under the following heads:-
(i) LOSS OF DEPENDENCY
30. In this regard, the petitioners have examined
Petitioner No. 1 Smt. Ratna Sharma, who is wife of the
deceased as PW1, who deposed that at the relevant time, the
deceased was self employed (Contractor). In order to prove the
income the deceased, the petitioners have filed the copy of ITR
Mark A for the Assessment Year 2015-16. As per which the net
income of the deceased was Rs. 6,52,864/- (Rs. 7,03,464/- Less
Rs. 50,600/-[Income- Tax]) and same is considered for the
purpose of quantification of compensation amount.
31. Petitioners have claimed that the deceased was aged
about 53 years at the time of his death. They have placed on
record the copy of election I Card of the deceased. As per the
said document, the age of deceased as on 01/01/1994 was 28
years. Whereas in the ITRs of deceased, the date of birth is
mentioned as 08/07/1964. During the course of final arguments,
Ld. Counsel for R-3/ Insurance Company has prayed to
consider the age of the deceased Ramesh Chand Sharma as per
the ITRs and not as per the election I-Card.
31.1 This Tribunal is of considered opinion that the age on
the ITRs of the deceased is more authenticate and reliable than
the date of birth mentioned on the Voter I-Card of the deceased
MACT No. 58321/16 Ratna Sharma & Ors. Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58322/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58323/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors. Page No. 23/48
PANKAJ Digitally signed by
PANKAJ SHARMA
SHARMA 12:18:20 +0530
Date: 2025.04.23
as the date of birth mentioned in the ITRs is self declaratory in
nature. In the facts and circumstances, the age of the deceased
is considered as per ITRs filed by the deceased himself. As per
the said documents, the date of birth of the deceased was
08/07/1964. The date of accident is 27/11/2015. Going by the
said record, the age of deceased would be around 51 years as on
the date of accident. Hence, in view of the law laid down by the
Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Sarla Verma & Ors. Vs.
Delhi Transport Corporation & Anr., (2009) 6 SCC 121, which
has also been upheld by the Constitutional Bench of the Hon’ble
Supreme Court in the case of National Insurance Company Ltd.
Vs. Pranay Sethi & Ors. SLP (Civil) No. 25590 of 2014,
decided on 31.10.2017, the multiplier of ’11’ is held applicable
for calculating the loss of dependency caused to the petitioners
on account of death of the deceased.
32. Coming to the dependency of deceased at the time
of accident, it is observed that the deceased was survived by his
wife, one son and one daughter. All are considered to be
dependents of the deceased.
33. Irrespective of this, one third of the earnings of
deceased shall be deducted towards his personal and living
expenses in view of the law already discussed above. During the
course of arguments on behalf of R-3/ Insurance Company it
was prayed that future prospects be considered 10%. The said
plea is rejected the income of the deceased is well documented
MACT No. 58321/16 Ratna Sharma & Ors. Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58322/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58323/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors. Page No. 24/48
Digitally signed
PANKAJ by PANKAJ
SHARMA
SHARMA Date: 2025.04.23
12:18:25 +0530
in the form of ITRs. Further, since this Tribunal has assumed
that the age of deceased was 51 years at the time of accident., in
view of the law laid down in the case of Pranay Sethi & Ors.
(Supra), the petitioner is also held entitled to an addition of 15%
of the above amount of his earnings towards future prospects.
34. Thus, the loss of dependency qua the deceased in the
present case comes to Rs.55,05,820/- (rounded off)
(Rs.6,52,864/- X 115/100 X 2/3 X 11). This amount is awarded
to the petitioners under this head.
(ii) COMPENSATION UNDER NON-PECUNIARY HEADS
35. In terms of propositions laid down by the Hon’ble
Supreme Court in the case of Rajwati @ Rajjo & Ors. Vs.
United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Civil Appeal No. 8179/2022
decided on 09/12/2022, the petitioners are also held entitled to
amounts of Rs. 20,000/- each under the heads of loss of estate
and funeral expenses. Further, in view of subsequent judgments
of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of United India
Insurance Company Ltd Vs Satinder Kaur & Ors
MANU/HC/0500/2020 and The New India Assurance Company
Ltd & Ors Vs Somwati & Ors MANU/HC/0674/2020, the
petitioners are also entitled to compensation under the head
“loss of consortium”: –
Spousal Consortium : Rs. 48,0000/- (Rs. 48,000/-X 1)
MACT No. 58321/16 Ratna Sharma & Ors. Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58322/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58323/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors. Page No. 25/48
PANKAJ Digitally signed by PANKAJ
SHARMA
SHARMA Date: 2025.04.23 12:18:29 +0530
Filial Consortium : Rs. 96,0000/- (Rs. 48,000/-X 2)
36. Hence, the petitioners are awarded a total sum
of Rs.1,84,000/- (Rs. 20,000/- + Rs. 20,000/- + Rs. 1,44,000/-)
under this head.
COMPENSATION IN CASE NO. 58322/16 (For Grant of
Compensation in respect of the death of deceased Sh. Mayur
Sharma) :
37. The compensation to which the petitioners are
entitled shall be under the following heads:-
(i) LOSS OF DEPENDENCY
38. In this regard, the petitioners have examined
Petitioner No. 1 Smt. Ratna Sharma, who is mother of the
deceased as PW1, who deposed that at the relevant time, the
deceased was self employed (Contractor). In order to prove the
income the deceased, the petitioners have filed the copy of ITR
Mark A for the Assessment Year 2015-16. As per which the
income of the deceased was Rs.2,68,500/- and same is
considered for the purpose for quantification of compensation
amount.
39. Petitioner has claimed that the deceased was aged
about 25 years at the time of his death. He has placed on record
the the copy of postmortem report of the deceased. Going by
MACT No. 58321/16 Ratna Sharma & Ors. Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58322/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58323/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors. Page No. 26/48
Digitally signed
by PANKAJ
PANKAJ SHARMA
SHARMA Date:
2025.04.23
12:18:50 +0530
the said record, the age of deceased is considered 25 years as on
the date of accident. Hence, in view of the law laid down by the
Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Sarla Verma & Ors. Vs.
Delhi Transport Corporation & Anr., (2009) 6 SCC 121, which
has also been upheld by the Constitutional Bench of the Hon’ble
Supreme Court in the case of National Insurance Company Ltd.
Vs. Pranay Sethi & Ors. SLP (Civil) No. 25590 of 2014,
decided on 31.10.2017, the multiplier of ’18’ is held applicable
for calculating the loss of dependency caused to the petitioners
on account of death of the deceased.
40. Coming to the dependency of deceased at the time
of accident, it is observed that the deceased was survived by his
son i.e. the petitioner herein who shall be treated as dependent
of the deceased.
41. Irrespective of this, one half of the earnings of
deceased shall be deducted towards his personal and living
expenses in view of the law already discussed above. During the
course of arguments on behalf of R-3/ Insurance Company it
was prayed that future prospects be considered 40%. The said
plea is rejected the income of the deceased is well documented
in the form of ITRs. Further, since this Tribunal has assumed
that the age of deceased was 25 years at the time of accident., in
view of the law laid down in the case of Pranay Sethi & Ors.
(Supra), the petitioner is also held entitled to an addition of 50%
of the above amount of his earnings towards future prospects.
MACT No. 58321/16 Ratna Sharma & Ors. Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58322/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58323/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors. Page No. 27/48
Digitally signed
by PANKAJ
PANKAJ SHARMA
SHARMA Date:
2025.04.23
12:18:56 +0530
42. Thus, the loss of dependency qua the deceased in the
present case comes to Rs.36,24,750/ (Rs.2,68,500/- X 150/100
X 1/2 X 18). This amount is awarded to the petitioners under
this head.
(ii) COMPENSATION UNDER NON-PECUNIARY HEADS
43. In terms of propositions laid down by the Hon’ble
Supreme Court in the case of Rajwati @ Rajjo & Ors. Vs.
United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Civil Appeal No. 8179/2022
decided on 09/12/2022, the petitioners are also held entitled to
amounts of Rs. 20,000/- each under the heads of loss of estate
and funeral expenses. Further, in view of subsequent judgments
of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of United India
Insurance Company Ltd Vs Satinder Kaur & Ors
MANU/HC/0500/2020 and The New India Assurance Company
Ltd & Ors Vs Somwati & Ors MANU/HC/0674/2020, the
petitioners are also entitled to compensation under the head
“loss of consortium”: –
Filial Consortium : Rs. 48,0000/- (Rs. 48,000/-X 1)
44. Hence, the petitioners are awarded a total
sum of Rs.88,000/- (Rs. 20,000/- + Rs. 20,000/- + Rs.
48,000/-) under this head.
COMPENSATION IN CASE NO. 58323/16 (For Grant
of Compensation in respect of the death of deceased
MACT No. 58321/16 Ratna Sharma & Ors. Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58322/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58323/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors. Page No. 28/48
Digitally signed
by PANKAJ
PANKAJ SHARMA
SHARMA Date:
2025.04.23
12:18:59 +0530
Smt. Bhavna Sharma) :
45. Since the petitioner Master Daksh has already been
granted compensation on account of death of his father
who was the earning member in the connected case bearing
MACT No. 58322/16, therefore, only loss of parental
consortium of Rs. 48,000/- is granted to petitioner in this
matter bearing MACT No. 58323/16 on account of the fatal
injuries sustained by his mother namely Smt. Bhavna
Sharma.
ISSUE NO.3 / RELIEF
46. The petitioners (IN CASE NO. 58321/16 (For
Grant of Compensation in respect of the death of deceased Sh.
Ramesh Chand Sharma) are thus awarded a sum of
Rs.56,89,820/(Rupees Fifty Six Lakhs Eighty Nine Thousand
Eight Hundred and Twenty Only) (Rs.73,55,601/- +
Rs.1,84,000/-) along with interest @ 9% per annum from the
date of filing of petition i.e. 21/09/2016. Since no interim
compensation has been awarded, therefore no deduction is
applicable.
47. The petitioner (IN CASE NO. 58322/16 (For
Grant of Compensation in respect of the death of deceased Sh.
Mayur Sharma) is thus awarded a sum of Rs.37,12,750/-
(Rupees Thirty Seven Lakhs Twelve Thousand Seven Hundred
and Fifty Only) (Rs.36,24,750/- + Rs. 88,000/-) along with
interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of petition i.e.
MACT No. 58321/16 Ratna Sharma & Ors. Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58322/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58323/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors. Page No. 29/48
Digitally signed
by PANKAJ
PANKAJ SHARMA
SHARMA Date:
2025.04.23
12:19:03 +0530
21/09/2016. Since no interim compensation has been awarded,
therefore no deduction is applicable.
48. The petitioner (IN CASE NO. 58323/16 (For
Grant of Compensation in respect of the death of deceased Smt.
Bhavna Sharma) is thus awarded a sum of Rs.48,000/- (Rupees
Forty Eight Thousand Only) along with interest @ 9% per
annum from the date of filing of petition i.e. 21/09/2016. Since
no interim compensation has been awarded, therefore no
deduction is applicable.
RELEASE IN CASE NO. 58321/16 (For Grant of
Compensation in respect of the death of deceased Sh.
Ramesh Chand Sharma) :
49. Petitioners did not bother to appear before this Tribunal
for recording their statements regarding financial needs and
requirements.
49.1 Out of the awarded amount, Petitioner No. 1 is
awarded a sum of Rs.72,00,000/- (Rupees Seventy Two Lakhs
Only) and the said amount is directed to be kept with State Bank
of India, Branch Tis Hazari Courts, New Delhi in MACAD in the
form of 360 monthly fixed deposit receipts (FDRs) payable in
equal amounts for a period of 1 to 360 months in succession, as
per the scheme formulated by Central Motor Vehicles (fifth
Amendment) Rules, 2022 [(Directions at serial no. 35, 36 of
Procedure for Investigation of Motor Vehicle Accidents (under
MACT No. 58321/16 Ratna Sharma & Ors. Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58322/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58323/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors. Page No. 30/48
Digitally signed
by PANKAJ
PANKAJ SHARMA
SHARMA Date:
2025.04.23
12:19:07 +0530
Rule 150A)]. The amount of FDRs on maturity would be
released in her savings/MACT Claims SB Account as and when
she furnishes the details of her bank account which is near the
place of her residence to the Bank Manager, State Bank of India,
Tis Hazari Courts, New Delhi under intimation to the Civil Nazir
of this Tribunal. The remaining amount of Rs.8,68,164/- (Rupees
Eight Lakhs Sixty Eight Thousand One Hundred and Sixty Four
Only ) is also directed to be released into her above said account,
which can be withdrawn and utilized by the Petitioner no. 1.
49.2 Out of the awarded amount, Petitioner No. 2 & 3 are
awarded a sum of Rs.9,00,000/- each (Rupees Nine Lakhs Only)
and the said amount is directed to be kept with State Bank of
India, Branch Tis Hazari Courts, New Delhi in MACAD in the
form of 45 monthly fixed deposit receipts (FDRs) payable in
equal amounts for a period of 1 to 45 months in succession, as
per the scheme formulated by Central Motor Vehicles (fifth
Amendment) Rules, 2022 [(Directions at serial no. 35, 36 of
Procedure for Investigation of Motor Vehicle Accidents (under
Rule 150A)].The amount of FDRs on maturity would be released
in their savings/MACT Claims SB Accounts as and when they
furnish the details of their bank accounts which is near the place
of her residence to the Bank Manager, State Bank of India, Tis
Hazari Courts, New Delhi under intimation to the Civil Nazir of
this Tribunal. The remaining amount of Rs.1,08,521/- each
(Rupees One Lakh Eight Thousand Five Hundred and TwentyMACT No. 58321/16 Ratna Sharma & Ors. Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58322/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58323/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors. Page No. 31/48
Digitally signed by
PANKAJ PANKAJ SHARMA
SHARMA Date: 2025.04.23
12:19:11 +0530
One Only ) is also directed to be released into their above said
accounts, which can be withdrawn and utilized by the Petitioners
No. 2 & 3 respectively.
RELEASE IN CASE NO. 58322/16 (For Grant of
Compensation in respect of the death of deceased Sh. Mayur
Sharma) :
50. Petitioner did not bother to appear before this
Tribunal for recording his statement regarding financial needs
and requirements.
50.1 Out of the awarded amount, Petitioner is awarded a sum
of Rs.58,00,000/- (Rupees Fifty Eight Lakhs Only) and the said
amount is directed to be kept with State Bank of India, Branch
Tis Hazari Courts, New Delhi in MACAD in the form of 290
monthly fixed deposit receipts (FDRs) payable in equal amounts
for a period of 1 to 290 months in succession, as per the scheme
formulated by Central Motor Vehicles (fifth Amendment) Rules,
2022 [(Directions at serial no. 35, 36 of Procedure for
Investigation of Motor Vehicle Accidents (under Rule
150A)].The amount of FDRs on maturity would be released in
his savings/MACT Claims SB Account as and when he furnishes
the details of his bank account which is near the place of his
residence to the Bank Manager, State Bank of India, Tis Hazari
Courts, New Delhi under intimation to the Civil Nazir of this
Tribunal. The remaining amount of Rs.7,80,850/- (Rupees Seven
Lakhs Eighty Thousand Eight Hundred and Fifty Only ) is also
MACT No. 58321/16 Ratna Sharma & Ors. Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58322/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58323/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors. Page No. 32/48
PANKAJ Digitally signed by
PANKAJ SHARMA
SHARMA Date: 2025.04.23
12:19:15 +0530
directed to be released into his above said account, which can be
withdrawn and utilized by the Petitioner.
RELEASE IN CASE NO. 58323/16 (For Grant of Smt.
Bhavna Sharma) :
51. Petitioner did not bother to appear before this
Tribunal for recording his statement regarding financial needs
and requirements.
51.1 The Petitioner in MACT No. 58323/16 is awarded a
sum of Rs.85,080/- (Rupees Eighty Five Thousand and Eighty
Only) and the entire amount be released in his savings/MACT
Claims SB Account as and when he furnishes the details of his
bank account which is near the place of his residence to the Bank
Manager, State Bank of India, Tis Hazari Courts, New Delhi
under intimation to the Civil Nazir of this Tribunal which can be
withdrawn and utilized by the Petitioner.
LIABILITY
52. On the point of liability, Ld. Counsel for R-3/ Insurance
Company has submitted that R-1 & R-2 were served with a
notice issued under Order 12 Rule 8 CPC to produce his driving
licence, but the same was never produced before it(R-3) or
before this Tribunal. He further submitted that R-1 was charge-
sheeted inter alia U/s 181, 184, 185, 192, 192क, 196 of M.V. Act.
Ld. Counsel for R-3/ Insurance Company further submitted in
support of above claim regarding dispatch of notice U/o 12 Rule
MACT No. 58321/16 Ratna Sharma & Ors. Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58322/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58323/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors. Page No. 33/48
Digitally signed
PANKAJ by PANKAJ
SHARMA
SHARMA Date: 2025.04.23
12:19:18 +0530
8 CPC to R-1 & R-2. It is accordingly argued by Ld. Counsel
for R-3/ Insurance Company that since R-1 was plying the
offending vehicle without any valid driving licence, it (R-3) is
liable to be discharged. It has been noted by this Tribunal that
R-1 & R-2 have failed to place any valid and effective driving
licence of R-1 on record. It is not disputed that R-1 was charge-
sheeted inter alia U/s 181, 184, 185, 192, 192क, 196 of M.V. Act.
Accordingly, it could be safely assumed that R-1 was driving the
offending vehicle without any valid driving licence. This entitles
R-3 to be granted recovery rights against R-1 and R-2 jointly ans
severally. Ordered accordingly.
53. R-3/ Insurance Company is directed to deposit the
above award amount within 30 days from the date of this Award
by way of NEFT or RTGS mode in the account of this Tribunal
maintained with SBI, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi (account holder’s
name-Motor Accident Claims Tribunal 02 Central, A/C No.
40743576901, IFSC Code SBIN0000726 under intimation to the
petitioner and this Tribunal in terms of the format for remittance
of compensation as provided in Divisional Manager Vs. Rajesh,
2016 SCC Online Mad. 1913 (and reiterated by Hon’ble
Supreme Court in the orders dated 16.03.2021 and 16.11.2021
titled as Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union
of India & Ors) along with interest @ 9% per annum, failing
which it will be liable to pay interest at the rate of 12% per
annum for the period of delay.
MACT No. 58321/16 Ratna Sharma & Ors. Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58322/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58323/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors. Page No. 34/48
Digitally signed by
PANKAJ PANKAJ SHARMA
SHARMA Date: 2025.04.23
12:19:22 +0530
54. A digital copy of this award be forwarded to the
parties free of cost. Ahlmad is directed to send the copy of
the award to Ld. Metropolitan Magistrate concerned and Delhi
Legal Services Authority in view of Central Motor Vehicles
(fifth Amendment) Rules, 2022 [(Directions at serial nos. 39, 40
of Procedure for Investigation of Motor Vehicle Accidents (under
Rule 150A)]. Further Nazir is directed to maintain the record in
Form XVIII in view of Central Motor Vehicles (fifth
Amendment) Rules, 2022 [(Directions at serial no. 41 of
Procedure for Investigation of Motor Vehicle Accidents (under
Rule 150A).
55. Ahlmad is directed to e-mail an authenticated copy
of the award to the insurer as directed by the Hon’ble Supreme
Court of India in WP (Civil) No. 534/2020 titled as Bajaj
Allianz General Insurance Co. Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India &
Ors. on 16.03.2021. Ahlmad shall also e-mail an authenticated
copy of the award to Branch Manager, SBI, Tis Hazari Courts
for information.
56. Ahlmad is further directed to comply with the
directions passed by the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in MAC
APP No. 10/2021 titled as New India Assurance Company Ltd.
Vs. Sangeeta Vaid & Ors., date of decision : 06.01.2021
regarding digitisation of the records.
MACT No. 58321/16 Ratna Sharma & Ors. Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58322/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58323/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors. Page No. 35/48
PANKAJ Digitally signed by
PANKAJ SHARMA
SHARMA Date: 2025.04.23
12:19:26 +0530
File be consigned to Record Room.
A separate file be prepared for compliance report and put
Digitally signed
up the same on 22.05.2025. PANKAJ
by PANKAJ
SHARMA
SHARMA Date:
2025.04.23
12:19:30 +0530Announced in the open court (DR. PANKAJ SHARMA)
on this 22.04.2025 PO MACT-02 (CENTRAL)
DELHIFORM – XV, Central Motor Vehicles (fifth Amendment) Rules,
2022 (Pl. see Rule 150A)SUMMARY OF COMPUTATION OF AWARD AMOUNT IN
DEATH CASES
1. Date of accident. : 20/12/2017
2. Name of the deceased : Sh. Ramesh Chand
Sharma
3. Age of the deceased : 51 years
4. Occupation of the deceased : Self Employed
(Contractor)
5. Income of the deceased : Assessed on the
basis of ITRs at the
relevant time
6. Name, age and relationship of legal representative of
deceased:-
MACT No. 58321/16 Ratna Sharma & Ors. Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58322/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58323/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors. Page No. 36/48 Digitally signed PANKAJ by PANKAJ SHARMA SHARMA Date: 2025.04.23 12:19:33 +0530 S. No. Name Age Relation (1) Ratna Sharma 54 Years Wife of the deceased (2) Gopal Sharma 25 Years Son of the deceased (3) Yamini Sharma 33 Years Daughter of deceased Computation of Compensation Sr. No. Heads Awarded by the Claims Tribunal 7. Income of the Rs.6,52,864/- per annum deceased(A) 8. Add-Future Prospects 15% (B) 9. Less-Personal One Third deduction has been expenses of the done. deceased(C) MACT No. 58321/16 Ratna Sharma & Ors. Vs. Harpal & Ors. MACT No. 58322/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors. MACT No. 58323/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors. Page No. 37/48 Digitally signed by PANKAJ PANKAJ SHARMA SHARMA Date: 2025.04.23 12:19:38 +0530 10. Annual loss of Rs.5,00,529.07/- dependency[(A+B)- C=D] 11. Annual loss of Rs.5,00,529.07/- dependency (Dx12) 12. Multiplier(E) '11' 13. Total loss of dependency (Dx12xE= F) Rs.55,05,820/- 14. Medical Expenses(G) NIL
15. Compensation for loss Rs. 1,44,000/-
of consortium(H)
16. Compensation for loss NIL
of love and affection
(I)
17. Compensation for loss Rs. 20,000/-
of estate(J)
18. Compensation Rs. 20,000/-
towards funeral
MACT No. 58321/16 Ratna Sharma & Ors. Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58322/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58323/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors. Page No. 38/48
Digitally signed by
PANKAJ PANKAJ SHARMA
SHARMA Date: 2025.04.23
12:19:42 +0530
expenses(K)
19.
TOTAL Rs.56,89,820/-
COMPENSATION
(F+G+H+I+J+K=L)
20.
RATE OF INTEREST 9%
AWARDED
21.
Interest amount up to Rs.43,95,386/- (rounded off)
the date of award(M)
22.
Total amount Rs.1,00,85,206/-
including interest(L +
M)
23.
Award amount P-1 : Rs.8,68,164/-
released
P-2 : Rs.1,08,521/-
P-3 : Rs.1,08,521/-
24.
Award amount kept in As per award
FDRs
25.
Mode of disbursement Mentioned in the award
MACT No. 58321/16 Ratna Sharma & Ors. Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58322/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58323/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors. Page No. 39/48
Digitally signed by
PANKAJ PANKAJ SHARMA
SHARMA Date: 2025.04.23
12:19:46 +0530
of the award amount
to the petitioner (s)
26. 22/05/2025
Next date for
compliance of the
award
FORM – XV, Central Motor Vehicles (fifth Amendment) Rules,
2022 (Pl. see Rule 150A)
SUMMARY OF COMPUTATION OF AWARD AMOUNT IN
DEATH CASES
1. Date of accident. : 27/11/2015
2. Name of the deceased : Sh. Mayur Sharma
3. Age of the deceased : 25 years
4. Occupation of the deceased : Self Employed
(Contractor)
5. Income of the deceased : Assessed on the
basis of ITRs at the
relevant time.
6. Name, age and relationship of legal representative of
deceased:-
MACT No. 58321/16 Ratna Sharma & Ors. Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58322/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58323/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors. Page No. 40/48 Digitally signed PANKAJ by PANKAJ SHARMA SHARMA Date: 2025.04.23 12:19:51 +0530 S. No. Name Age Relation (1) Master Daksh Sharma 11 Years Son of the deceased Computation of Compensation Sr. No. Heads Awarded by the Claims Tribunal 7. Income of the Rs. 2,68,500/- per annum deceased(A) 8. Add-Future Prospects 50% (B) 9. Less-Personal One half deduction has been expenses of the done. deceased(C) 10. Anual loss of Rs.2,01,375/- dependency[(A+B)- C=D] 11. Annual loss of As above MACT No. 58321/16 Ratna Sharma & Ors. Vs. Harpal & Ors. MACT No. 58322/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors. MACT No. 58323/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors. Page No. 41/48 Digitally signed by PANKAJ PANKAJ SHARMA SHARMA Date: 2025.04.23 12:19:57 +0530 dependency (Dx12) 12. Multiplier(E) '18' 13. Total loss of dependency (Dx12xE= F) Rs.36,24,750/- 14. Medical Expenses(G) NIL
15. Compensation for loss Rs. 48,000/-
of consortium(H)
16. Compensation for loss NIL
of love and affection
(I)
17. Compensation for loss Rs. 20,000/-
of estate(J)
18. Compensation Rs. 20,000/-
towards funeral
expenses(K)
19.
TOTAL Rs.37,12,750/-
COMPENSATION
MACT No. 58321/16 Ratna Sharma & Ors. Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58322/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58323/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors. PageDigitally
No. 42/48signed by
PANKAJ PANKAJ SHARMA
SHARMA Date: 2025.04.23
12:20:00 +0530
(F+G+H+I+J+K=L)
20.
RATE OF INTEREST 9%
AWARDED
21.
Interest amount up to Rs.28,68,100 /- (rounded off)
the date of award(M)
22.
Total amount Rs.65,80,850/-
including interest(L +
M)
23.
Award amount Rs.7,80,850/-
released
24.
Award amount kept in As per award
FDRs
25.
Mode of disbursement Mentioned in the award
of the award amount
to the petitioner (s)
MACT No. 58321/16 Ratna Sharma & Ors. Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58322/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58323/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors. Page No. 43/48
Digitally signed by
PANKAJ PANKAJ SHARMA
SHARMA Date: 2025.04.23
12:20:04 +0530
26. 22/05/2025
Next date for
compliance of the
award
FORM – XV, Central Motor Vehicles (fifth Amendment) Rules,
2022 (Pl. see Rule 150A)
SUMMARY OF COMPUTATION OF AWARD AMOUNT IN
DEATH CASES
1. Date of accident. : 27/11/2015
2. Name of the deceased : Sh. Bhavna Sharma
3. Age of the deceased : 23 years
4. Occupation of the deceased : Housewife
5. Income of the deceased : NA
6. Name, age and relationship of legal representative of
deceased:-
MACT No. 58321/16 Ratna Sharma & Ors. Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58322/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58323/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors. Page No. 44/48 Digitally signed by PANKAJ PANKAJ SHARMA SHARMA Date: 2025.04.23 12:20:07 +0530 S. No. Name Age Relation (1) Master Daksh Sharma 11 Years Son of the deceased Computation of Compensation Sr. No. Heads Awarded by the Claims Tribunal 7. Income of the NIL deceased(A) 8. Add-Future Prospects NIL (B) 9. Less-Personal expenses NIL of the deceased(C) 10. Annual loss of NIL dependency[(A+B)- C=D] 11. Annual loss of NIL dependency (Dx12) MACT No. 58321/16 Ratna Sharma & Ors. Vs. Harpal & Ors. MACT No. 58322/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors. MACT No. 58323/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors. Page No. 45/48 PANKAJ Digitally signed by PANKAJ SHARMA SHARMA Date: 2025.04.23 12:20:12 +0530 12. Multiplier(E) NIL 13. Total loss of dependency (Dx12xE= F) NIL 14. Medical Expenses(G) NIL
15. Compensation for loss Rs. 48,000/-
of consortium(H)
16. Compensation for loss NIL
of love and affection (I)
17. Compensation for loss NIL
of estate(J)
18. Compensation towards NIL
funeral expenses(K)
19.
TOTAL Rs.48,000/-
COMPENSATION
(F+G+H+I+J+K=L)
20.
RATE OF INTEREST 9%
MACT No. 58321/16 Ratna Sharma & Ors. Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58322/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58323/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors. Page No. 46/48
Digitally signed
PANKAJ by PANKAJ
SHARMA
SHARMA Date: 2025.04.23
12:20:15 +0530
AWARDED
21.
Interest amount up to Rs.37,080 /- (rounded off)
the date of award(M)
22.
Total amount including Rs.85,080/-
interest(L + M)
23.
Award amount released Entire
24.
Award amount kept in NIL
FDRs
25.
Mode of disbursement Mentioned in the award
of the award amount to
the petitioner (s)
MACT No. 58321/16 Ratna Sharma & Ors. Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58322/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58323/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors. Page No. 47/48
Digitally signed
PANKAJ by PANKAJ
SHARMA
SHARMA Date: 2025.04.23
12:20:18 +0530
26. 22/05/2025
Next date for
compliance of the
award
CONCLUSION:-
1. As per award dated 22.04.2025.
2. A separate file was ordered to be prepared by the Nazir
with directions to put up the same on 22.05.2025.
Digitally signed
PANKAJ by PANKAJ
SHARMA
SHARMA Date: 2025.04.23
12:20:23 +0530
(DR. PANKAJ SHARMA)
PO MACT-02 (CENTRAL)
DELHI/22/04/2025
MACT No. 58321/16 Ratna Sharma & Ors. Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58322/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors.
MACT No. 58323/16 Master Daksh Sharma Vs. Harpal & Ors. Page No. 48/48
Digitally signed
PANKAJ by PANKAJ
SHARMA
SHARMA Date: 2025.04.23
12:20:26 +0530
[ad_1]
Source link