Delhi District Court
Basant Ram Verma Lrs Of Decease Sandeep … vs Devender Giri @ Devu on 5 May, 2025
DLCT010091612022
Presented on : 07-06-2022
Registered on : 13-06-2022
Decided on : 05-05-2025
Duration : 02 Years 11
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. 538/22 (For Grant
of Compensation in respect of the death of deceased
Sandeep Kumar Verma) :
1. BASANT RAM VERMA
S/o Sri Nath Verma
2. SMT. YASHODA DEVI
W/o Sh. Basant Ram Verma
3. VIVEK VERMA
S/o Sh. Basant Ram Verma
All R/o Village Kapasi PS Plus Post,
Antu Distt. Pratapgarh, UP-230501. .......Petitioners
VERSUS
1. DEVINDER GIRI
S/o Late Shankar Giri
R/o Sita Ram Chowk, Ambey Colony,
Naseeb Vihar, Chauhan Patti,
Loni Ghaziabad, UP. (Driver-cum-Owner).
MACT No. 538/22 Basant Ram Verma & Ors. Vs. Devinder Giri & Ors. Page No. 1/33
MACT No. 539/22 Anil Kumar @ Anil Gupta Vs. Devinder Giri & Ors. Digitally signed
PANKAJ by PANKAJ
SHARMA
SHARMA Date: 2025.05.05
13:17:43 +0530
2. SANJAY KUMAR GUPTA
S/o Sh. Dhiraj Giri
R/o H.No. 74, E- Block, Chanakya Place,
Part-I, Opposite C-1, Janak Puri,
C-Block, Delhi-110059
Ghaziabad, UP.(Registered Owner).
3. VIKAS BHARTI
S/o Sh. Amar Singh
R/o H.No. S-4/9, Gali No. 3,
Old Mahavir Nagar,
New Delhi-110018.(Subsequent Owner).
4. DALIP KUMAR
S/o Sh. Prahlad Kumar
R/o H.No. S-4/9, Gali No. 3,
Old Mahavir Nagar,
New Delhi-110018.(Subsequent Owner).
5. SIKANDER @ EKHLAKH
S/o Sh. Farid
R/o H.No. 1296, Gali No. 14,
1/ 2 Nehru Vihar, Dayal Pur,
Delhi.(Subsequent Owner).
.......Respondents
AND
DLCT010091592022
Presented on : 07-06-2022
Registered on : 13-06-2022
Decided on : 05-05-2025
Duration : 02 Years 11
Months
MACT No. 538/22 Basant Ram Verma & Ors. Vs. Devinder Giri & Ors. Page No. 2/33
MACT No. 539/22 Anil Kumar @ Anil Gupta Vs. Devinder Giri & Ors. Digitally signed
PANKAJ by PANKAJ
SHARMA
SHARMA Date: 2025.05.05
13:17:48 +0530
IN THE MATTER OF CASE / MACT No. 539/22 (For
Grant of Compensation in respect of the injuries sustained by
injured Anil Kumar @ Anil Gupta) :
ANIL KUMAR @ ANIL GUPTA
S/o Sh. Ram Narayan Gupta
R/o H.No. B-864, Gali No. 12,
1st Pusta, Sonia Vihar,
Delhi. …….InjuredVs.
1. DEVINDER GIRI
S/o Late Shankar Giri
R/o Sita Ram Chowk, Ambey Colony,
Naseeb Vihar, Chauhan Patti,
Loni Ghaziabad, UP. (Driver-cum-Owner).
2. SANJAY KUMAR GUPTA
S/o Sh. Dhiraj Giri
R/o H.No. 74, E- Block, Chanakya Place,
Part-I, Opposite C-1, Janak Puri,
C-Block, Delhi-110059.(Registered Owner).
3. VIKAS BHARTI
S/o Sh. Amar Singh
R/o H.No. S-4/9, Gali No. 3,
Old Mahavir Nagar,
New Delhi-110018.(Subsequent Owner).
4. DALIP KUMAR
S/o Sh. Prahlad Kumar
R/o H.No. S-4/9, Gali No. 3,
Old Mahavir Nagar,
New Delhi-110018.(Subsequent Owner).
MACT No. 538/22 Basant Ram Verma & Ors. Vs. Devinder Giri & Ors. Page No. 3/33
MACT No. 539/22 Anil Kumar @ Anil Gupta Vs. Devinder Giri & Ors. Digitally signed
by PANKAJ
PANKAJ SHARMA
SHARMA Date:
2025.05.05
13:17:54 +0530
5. SIKANDER @ EKHLAKH
S/o Sh. Farid
R/o H.No. 1296, Gali No. 14,
1/ 2 Nehru Vihar, Dayal Pur,
Delhi.(Subsequent Owner).
…….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 10/01/22
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 N.A.
Form-VIB from the Victim(s)
8. Date of filing of Form-VII – Detailed 02/07/22
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 Designated Not mentioned
Officer by the Insurance Company
11. Whether the Designated Officer of the No
Insurance Company submitted his
report within 30 days of the DAR?
MACT No. 538/22 Basant Ram Verma & Ors. Vs. Devinder Giri & Ors. Page No. 4/33
MACT No. 539/22 Anil Kumar @ Anil Gupta Vs. Devinder Giri & Ors. Digitally signed
PANKAJ by PANKAJ
SHARMA
SHARMA Date: 2025.05.05
13:17:58 +0530
12. Whether there was any delay or No
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 05/05/25
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) 02/07/22
was/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 claimant(s) and make an
endorsement to this effect on the
passbook.
17. Date on which the claimant(s) N.A.
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 the IN MACT No.
Claimant(s). 538/22
Village Kapasi PS
Plus Post,
Antu Distt.
Pratapgarh,
UP-230501
MACT No. 538/22 Basant Ram Verma & Ors. Vs. Devinder Giri & Ors. Page No. 5/33
MACT No. 539/22 Anil Kumar @ Anil Gupta Vs. Devinder Giri & Ors.
Digitally signed by
PANKAJ PANKAJ SHARMA
SHARMA Date: 2025.05.05
13:18:03 +0530
IN MACT NO.
539/22
H.No. B-864, Gali
No. 12, 1st Pusta,
Sonia Vihar,
Delhi.
19. Whether the claimant(s) savings bank N.A.
account(s) is near his place of
residence?
20. Whether the claimant(s) was/were N.A.
examined at the time of passing of the
award to ascertain his/their financial
condition?
COMMON AWARD/JUDGMENT
FACTUAL POSITION
1. Two separate DARs was filed on 13/06/2022 by the
Investigating Officer in the presence of all the parties of this case.
The first DAR was related to a motor vehicular accident dated
10/01/2022 in which one Sh. Sandeep Kumar Verma S/o Sh.
Basant Ram Verma (hereinafter referred to as “deceased”) lost
his life and the second DAR was related to a motor vehicular
accident dated 10/01/2022 in which one Sh. Anil Kumar @ Anil
Gupta S/o Sh. Ram Narayan Gupta (hereinafter referred to as
“injured”) suffered injuries. Subsequent to the filing of DARs,
the present petitions were filed on 30/11/2023 U/s 166 r/w
Section 140 of M.V. Act seeking compensation to the tune of Rs.
MACT No. 538/22 Basant Ram Verma & Ors. Vs. Devinder Giri & Ors. Page No. 6/33
MACT No. 539/22 Anil Kumar @ Anil Gupta Vs. Devinder Giri & Ors. Digitally signed
by PANKAJ
PANKAJ SHARMA
Date:
SHARMA 2025.05.05
13:18:08
+0530
50,00,000/- under Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 in respect of the
untimely death of the deceased in a motor vehicular accident
which took place on 10/01/2022 at about 08.30 PM. As per
injured PW-1-Anil Gupta( who is also an eye witness), that on
the date of accident, he with his friend namely Sandeep Kumar
Verma (deceased) were going to their home on their bicycles
after finishing their duty and at around 08.30 PM when they were
going towards Khyber Pass Red Light then suddenly a Champion
bearing registration no. DL-1LJ-7382 (hereinafter referred to as
“offending vehicle”) which was in very high speed and both the
petitioners fell on the road and then some unknown person took
them to the hospital and the injured got discharged on the same
night but his friend Sandeep Kumar Verma was in serious
condition and expired on 13/01/2022. An FIR no. 14/22 PS Civil
Lines was registered by the police U/s 279/337/304A IPC. R-1 is
stated to be the driver of the offending vehicle. R-2 is stated to be
the owner of the offending vehicle. Respondents were directed
to file their Written Statements.
1.1 It is stated that the deceased Sandeep Kumar Verma
was 24 years of age and was driver and was earning Rs.25,000/-
per month. As per petition, the petitioners were completely
dependent on the earnings of the deceased. Petitioners seek
compensation to the tune of Rs. 50 Lakhs in respect of the
untimely death of deceased in the abovesaid accident.
1.2 It is stated that the injured Sh. Anil Gupta was 23
MACT No. 538/22 Basant Ram Verma & Ors. Vs. Devinder Giri & Ors. Page No. 7/33
MACT No. 539/22 Anil Kumar @ Anil Gupta Vs. Devinder Giri & Ors.
Digitally signed by
PANKAJ PANKAJ SHARMA
SHARMA Date: 2025.05.05
13:18:15 +0530
years of age and was self employed and was earning Rs.21,500/-
per month. He further stated that he sustained grievous injuries.
He further claims that he has spent Rs. 5,00,000/- on his
treatment. Petitioner seeks compensation to the tune of Rs. 20
Lakhs in respect of the injuries sustained by him in the abovesaid
accident.
PLEADINGS in case No. 538/22 (For Grant of Compensation in
respect of the death of deceased Sandeep Kumar Verma ) :
2. No written statement was filed by the respondents and
accordingly, the right to file written statement on respondents was
closed vide order dated 24/12/2022 passed by Ld. Predecessor of
this Tribunal.
PLEADINGS in case No. 539/22 (For Grant of
Compensation in respect of the injuries sustained by
injured Anil Kumar @ Anil Gupta) :
3. No written statement was filed by the respondents and
accordingly, the right to file written statement on respondents was
closed vide order dated 24/12/2022 passed by Ld. Predecessor of
this Tribunal.
CONSOLIDATION OF CASES
4. Both the above matters were consolidated vide order
dated 17/04/2025 passed by this Tribunal and the matter for
Grant of Compensation in respect of the fatal injuries sustained
by deceased Sandeep Kumar Verma i.e. MACT No. 538/22 was
treated as a ”Lead Case.”
MACT No. 538/22 Basant Ram Verma & Ors. Vs. Devinder Giri & Ors. Page No. 8/33
MACT No. 539/22 Anil Kumar @ Anil Gupta Vs. Devinder Giri & Ors. Digitally signed by
PANKAJ PANKAJ SHARMA
SHARMA Date: 2025.05.05
13:18:20 +0530
EVIDENCE in case No. 538/22 (For Grant of Compensation in
respect of the death of deceased Sandeep Kumar Verma) :
5. In support of their contentions, the petitioners
examined Petitioner no. 1 Sh. Basant Ram Verma, who was
father of the deceased, as PW-1. PW-1 deposed, vide his affidavit
Ex. PW1/A, that the deceased who was his son lost his life on
13.01.2022 due to the motor vehicular accident dated 10.01.2022
as mentioned in para no. 1 of this award. He further stated that at
the relevant time, the deceased was aged about 24 years and was
driver by profession and was earning Rs.25,000/- per month as
salary. He further deposed that the deceased is survived by his
parents and brother. He has relied upon following documents in
support of her claim :-
“Ex. PW1/1 is copy of FIR;
Ex. PW-1/2 is complete set of DAR;
Ex.PW-1/3 is copy of salary slip of
deceased.”
5.1 He was cross-examined by the Ld. Counsel for R-1.
In his cross-examination, he denied that it was too foggy on
10.01.2022. He further deposed that he is not an eye witness of the
case, however, he received the information from one of his relative
who lives in Delhi. He denied the suggestion that Devender Giri was
not negligent in driving at the time of accident.
5.2 PE was then closed.
5.3 R-1 examined himself as R1W1 in his defence. He
MACT No. 538/22 Basant Ram Verma & Ors. Vs. Devinder Giri & Ors. Page No. 9/33
MACT No. 539/22 Anil Kumar @ Anil Gupta Vs. Devinder Giri & Ors.
Digitally signed by
PANKAJ PANKAJ SHARMA
SHARMA Date: 2025.05.05
13:18:25 +0530
deposed that on 10.01.2022 at about 08.30 PM, he was driving his
champion bearing No. DL-1LJ-7382 and was waiting at red light
situated at Khebar Pass, Civil Lines. He further deposed that on light
being green, he started his champion to cross the light in the mean
time, the deceased and injured Sandeep Kumar Verma and Anil Kumar
suddenly came before his Champion and he applied brake
immediately then his Champion hit the divider and got damaged. He
further deposed that the cyclist was slightly hit by his champion and
they fell on road and he was also injured in the said incident and the
people gathered at the spot. He further deposed that the public took
the injured to the hospital but he remained at the spot. He further
deposed that he took the medicines and treatment from private clinic.
He further deposed that the accident was caused due to the negligence
of injured/cyclist. He further deposed that he came to know later on
that Sandeep Kumar was passed away and Anil Kumar was discharged
from the hospital after treatment. He was cross-examined by Ld.
Counsel for petitioner. In his cross-examination he denied the
suggestion that the accident was occurred due to his own negligence.
He further denied the suggestion that he ran away from the spot after
the accident leaving behind hi vehicle.
EVIDENCE in case No. 539/22 (For Grant of Compensation
in respect of the injuries sustained by injured Anil Kumar
@ Anil Gupta)
6. Injured examined himself as PW-1 in the connected
case bearing MACT No. 539/22 and deposed, vide his affidavit
Ex. PW1/A, in line with the facts mentioned in Para No. 1 of this
award with respect to the circumstances surrounding the
occurrence of accident. As per injured PW-1 Anil Gupta( who is
MACT No. 538/22 Basant Ram Verma & Ors. Vs. Devinder Giri & Ors. Page No. 10/33
MACT No. 539/22 Anil Kumar @ Anil Gupta Vs. Devinder Giri & Ors. Digitally signed
by PANKAJ
PANKAJ SHARMA
SHARMA Date:
2025.05.05
13:18:29 +0530
also an eye witness), that on the date of accident, he with his
friend namely Sandeep Kumar Verma (deceased) were going to
their home on their bicycles after finishing their duty and at
around 08.30 PM when they were going towards Khyber Pass
Red Light then suddenly a Champion bearing registration no.
DL-1LJ-7382 (hereinafter referred to as “offending vehicle”)
which was in very high speed and both the petitioners fell on the
road and then some unknown person took them to the hospital
and the injured got discharged on the same night but his friend
Sandeep Kumar Verma was in serious condition and expired on
13/01/2022. He further deposed that he has sustained grievous
injuries in the aforesaid accident. He further deposed that he has
spent Rs.5,00,000/- on his treatment. He also placed on record
the following documents :-
“”Ex. PW1/1 is copy of FIR;
Ex. PW-1/2 is complete set of DAR;
Ex.PW-1/3 is copy of salary slip of
injured;
Ex.PW-1/4 is copy of claim petition”.
6.1 He was not cross-examined by Ld. Counsel for
respondents. In his cross-examination he deposed that i n the year
2022, he was doing the same work. He denied that that it was too
foggy at the time of accident.
6.2 PE was then closed.
6.3 R-1 examined himself as R1W1 in his defence. He
MACT No. 538/22 Basant Ram Verma & Ors. Vs. Devinder Giri & Ors. Page No. 11/33
MACT No. 539/22 Anil Kumar @ Anil Gupta Vs. Devinder Giri & Ors. Digitally signed
PANKAJ by PANKAJ
SHARMA
SHARMA Date: 2025.05.05
13:18:34 +0530
deposed that on 10.01.2022 at about 08.30 PM, he was driving his
champion bearing No. DL-1LJ-7382 and was waiting at red light
situated at Khebar Pass, Civil Lines. He further deposed that on light
being green, he started his champion to cross the light in the mean
time, the deceased and injured Sandeep Kumar Verma and Anil Kumar
suddenly came before his Champion and he applied brake
immediately then his Champion hit the divider and got damaged. He
further deposed that the cyclist was slightly hit by his champion and
they fell on road and he was also injured in the said incident and the
people gathered at the spot. He further deposed that the public took
the injured to the hospital but he remained at the spot. He further
deposed that he took the medicines and treatment from private clinic.
He further deposed that the accident was caused due to the negligence
of injured/cyclist. He further deposed that he came to know later on
that Sandeep Kumar was passed away and Anil Kumar was discharged
from the hospital after treatment. He was cross-examined by Ld.
Counsel for petitioner. In his cross-examination he denied the
suggestion that the accident was occurred due to his own negligence.
He further denied the suggestion that he ran away from the spot after
the accident leaving behind hi vehicle.
FINDINGS
7. Oral submissions were advanced by Ld. Counsel for
the parties and I have perused the record.
8. The very fact that R-1 has already been charge-
sheeted for the offences punishable under Sections
279/337/304A IPC & 39/192, 146/196, 56/192 MV Act in the
MACT No. 538/22 Basant Ram Verma & Ors. Vs. Devinder Giri & Ors. Page No. 12/33
MACT No. 539/22 Anil Kumar @ Anil Gupta Vs. Devinder Giri & Ors. Digitally signed
PANKAJ by PANKAJ
SHARMA
SHARMA Date: 2025.05.05
13:18:38 +0530
above criminal case/FIR in itself is a strong circumstance to
support the above oral testimony of injured and the case of
petitioner on these issues. The certified copies of FIR,
Chargesheet, Site plan, Mechanical inspection reports of
offending vehicle, MLC, Seizure Memos and Arrest Memo of
R-1 also corroborate the oral testimony of petitioner.
9. 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 at a high speed at the
relevant time.
10. 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-1has not explained
the circumstances under which his vehicle (i.e. the offending
vehicle) hit the bicycles which the deceased and the injured
were riding 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, 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.
11. In view of the Postmortem Report/ medical records
placed on the judicial files by the respective petitioner/s, no
dispute is left regarding the death of the deceased and the nature
MACT No. 538/22 Basant Ram Verma & Ors. Vs. Devinder Giri & Ors. Page No. 13/33
MACT No. 539/22 Anil Kumar @ Anil Gupta Vs. Devinder Giri & Ors.
Digitally signed
PANKAJ by PANKAJ
SHARMA
SHARMA Date: 2025.05.05
13:18:44 +0530
of injuries sustained by the injured in the above accident.
12. In view of the above discussion, this Tribunal holds
that the deceased died and the injured suffered grievous injuries
on his person on account of neglect and default of R-1 while
driving the offending vehicle at the relevant time. Both these
issues are thus decided against the respondents and in favour of
the petitioners in both the cases.
ISSUE NO. 2 ( IN BOTH THE MATTERS )
“Whether the petitioner/ petitioners are
entitled for compensation? If so, to what
amount and from whom?
13. As this Tribunal has already held that R1 was
responsible for the fatal injuries sustained by the deceased and
for the grievous injuries sustained by the injured, 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. 538/22 ( For Grant of
Compensation in respect of the death of deceased Sandeep
Kumar Verma) :
14. The compensation to which the petitioners are
entitled shall be under the following heads:-
(i) LOSS OF DEPENDENCY
MACT No. 538/22 Basant Ram Verma & Ors. Vs. Devinder Giri & Ors. Page No. 14/33
MACT No. 539/22 Anil Kumar @ Anil Gupta Vs. Devinder Giri & Ors. Digitally signed
by PANKAJ
PANKAJ SHARMA
SHARMA Date:
2025.05.05
13:18:48 +0530
15. In this regard, PW-1 deposed that at the relevant
time, the deceased was 24 years old, was driver by profession
and was earning Rs.25,000/- per month as salary. However,
there is no material available on record which could corroborate
the claim of PW-1 as to the monthly earnings of the deceased.
In the facts and circumstances, it would be appropriate to assess
the monthly income of the deceased as per the minimum wages
payable to a Skilled-Person in UP at the time of accident i.e.
10.01.022 were Rs.11.316.16/- per month.
16. Petitioners have claimed that the deceased was aged
about 24 years at the time of his death. They have placed on
record the copy of Aadhar Card of deceased, as per which the
date of birth of deceased is 05/12/1997. The date of accident is
10/01/2022. Going by the said records, the age of deceased
would be around 24 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.
17. Coming to the dependency of deceased at the time of
accident, it is observed that the deceased was survived by his
MACT No. 538/22 Basant Ram Verma & Ors. Vs. Devinder Giri & Ors. Page No. 15/33
MACT No. 539/22 Anil Kumar @ Anil Gupta Vs. Devinder Giri & Ors. Digitally
signed by
PANKAJ
PANKAJ SHARMA
SHARMA Date:
2025.05.05
13:18:54
+0530
parents and brother. However, only Petitioner No. 2/ mother of
the deceased is considered to be dependent upon the deceased.
18. 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. Further,
since this Tribunal has assumed that the age of deceased was 24
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 40% of the above amount of his
earnings towards future prospects.
19. Thus, the loss of dependency qua the deceased in the
present case comes to Rs.17,11,003/- (rounded off) (Rs.
11,316.16/- X 140/100 X 1/2 X12 X 18). This amount is
awarded to the petitioners under this head.
(ii) COMPENSATION UNDER NON-PECUNIARY HEADS
20. 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
MACT No. 538/22 Basant Ram Verma & Ors. Vs. Devinder Giri & Ors. Page No. 16/33
MACT No. 539/22 Anil Kumar @ Anil Gupta Vs. Devinder Giri & Ors.
Digitally signed
PANKAJ by PANKAJ
SHARMA
SHARMA Date: 2025.05.05
13:18:59 +0530
petitioners are also entitled to compensation under the head
“loss of consortium”: –
Filial Consortium : Rs. 96,000/- (Rs. 48,000/- X 2)
21. Hence, the petitioners are awarded a total sum
of Rs. 1,36,000/- (Rs.20,000/- + 20,000/- + Rs. 96,000/-) under
this head.
COMPENSATION IN CASE NO. 539/22 (For Grant of
Compensation in respect of the injuries sustained by injured
Anil Kumar @ Anil Gupta):
22. In terms of provisions contained in Section 168 of
the MV Act the compensation which is to be awarded by this
tribunal is required to be ‘just’. In the injury cases a claimant is
entitled to two different kinds of compensations i.e. pecuniary as
well as non-pecuniary damages. The pecuniary damages or
special damages are those damages which are awarded and
designed to make good the losses which are capable of being
calculated in terms of money and the object of awarding these
damages is to indemnify the claimant for the expenses which he
had already incurred or is likely to incur in respect of the injuries
suffered by him in the accident. The non-pecuniary or general
damages are those damages which are incapable of being
assessed by arithmetical calculations. The pecuniary or special
damages generally include the expenses incurred by the claimant
towards his treatment, special diet, conveyance, cost of nursing/
attendant, loss of income/earning capacity etc. and the non-
MACT No. 538/22 Basant Ram Verma & Ors. Vs. Devinder Giri & Ors. Page No. 17/33
MACT No. 539/22 Anil Kumar @ Anil Gupta Vs. Devinder Giri & Ors. Digitally signed
PANKAJ by PANKAJ
SHARMA
SHARMA Date: 2025.05.05
13:19:04 +0530
pecuniary damages generally include the compensation for the
mental or physical shock, pain and sufferings, loss of amenities
of life, marriage prospects and disfiguration etc. The above
categories falling under both the heads of compensation are not
exhaustive in nature but only illustrative. It is also necessary to
state here that no amount of money or compensation can put the
injured/claimant exactly in the same position or place where he
was before the accident and an effort is to be made only to
reasonably compensate him or to put him almost in the same
place or position where he could have been if the alleged
accident had not taken place and this compensation is to be
assessed in a fair, reasonable and equitable manner. The object of
compensating him is also not to reward him or to make him rich
in an unjust manner. It is also well settled that the ‘just’
compensation to be awarded to the claimant has to be calculated
objectively and it may involve some guess work in calculating
the different amounts which the claimant may be entitled under
the different heads of compensation. Reference in this regard can
be made on some of important judgments on the subject like the
judgment in the case of R.D. Hattangadi Vs. Pest Control (India)
Pvt. Ltd., AIR 1995 SC 755, Arvind Kumar Mishra Vs. New
India Assurance Company Limited, (2010) 10 SCC 254 and Raj
Kumar Vs. Ajay Kumar & Anr., (2011) 1 SCC 343.
23. In light of the above legal propositions, the amount
of compensation which could be considered to be ‘just’ in the
opinion of this tribunal shall be as under:-
MACT No. 538/22 Basant Ram Verma & Ors. Vs. Devinder Giri & Ors. Page No. 18/33
MACT No. 539/22 Anil Kumar @ Anil Gupta Vs. Devinder Giri & Ors.
Digitally signed by
PANKAJ PANKAJ SHARMA
SHARMA Date: 2025.05.05
13:19:09 +0530
(i) Medical or Treatment Expenses
24. The injured has not filed any medical bill and such
nothing is awarded to the petitioner.
(ii) Pain and Suffering
25. As discussed above, as per MLC the injured
sustained simple injuries. It is not possible to quantify the
compensation admissible to injured for the shock, pain and
sufferings etc. which he actually suffered because of the above
injuries, but as stated above, an effort has to be made to
compensate him for the same in a just and reasonable manner.
Hence, keeping in view the extent and nature of the injuries
suffered by injured and duration of the treatment taken by him
etc., an amount of Rs. 25,000/- is being awarded to him towards
pain and sufferings.
(ii) Loss of actual earnings
26. In his affidavit Ex. PW1/A, the petitioner claims
that he was 34 years old and was self employed and was earning
Rs.21,500/- from the said job at the relevant time. The medical
documents reflect that the petitioner sustained simple injuries.
In view of the nature of the injuries sustained by the petitioner, it
could be safely assumed that the petitioner could not have
worked for about 01 month due to the injuries sustained in the
accident. As per relevant notification, the minimum wages
admissible to an Un-skilled Person as on 10/01/2022 in Delhi
MACT No. 538/22 Basant Ram Verma & Ors. Vs. Devinder Giri & Ors. Page No. 19/33
Digitally
MACT No. 539/22 Anil Kumar @ Anil Gupta Vs. Devinder Giri & Ors. signed by
PANKAJ
PANKAJ SHARMA
SHARMA Date:
2025.05.05
13:19:13
+0530
were Rs.16,064/-. As such, the petitioner is held entitled to a
sum of Rs.16,064/-(Rs. 16,064/- X 1). The said sum is awarded
to the petitioner under this head.
(iii) Conveyance, Attendant Charges and Special Diet &
Amenities of life
27. In view of the nature of injuries sustained by the
petitioner Anil Gupta the extent of permanent physical disability
and the extended period of medical treatment, the petitioner is
granted a sum of Rs. 5,000/- each under these heads.
ISSUE NO.3 / RELIEF
28. The petitioners (IN CASE NO. 538/22 (For
Grant of Compensation in respect of the death of deceased
Sandeep Kumar Verma) are thus awarded a sum of
Rs.18,47,003/- (Rupees Eighteen Lakhs Forty Seven Thousand
and Three Only)(Rs.17,11,003/- + Rs.1,36,000/-) along with
interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of DAR i.e.
13/06/2022. Since no interim compensation has been awarded,
therefore no deduction is applicable.
29. The injured (IN CASE NO. 539/22 (For
Grant of Compensation in respect of the injuries
sustained by injured Anil Kumar @ Anil Gupta ) is thus
awarded a sum of Rs.77,093/- (Rupees Seventy Seven Thousand
and Ninety Three Only) (Rs.25,000/- Rs.16,064/- + Rs. 5,000/-
+ Rs. 5,000/- + Rs. 5,000/- + Rs.5,000/-) along with interest @
MACT No. 538/22 Basant Ram Verma & Ors. Vs. Devinder Giri & Ors. Page No. 20/33
MACT No. 539/22 Anil Kumar @ Anil Gupta Vs. Devinder Giri & Ors. Digitally signed
by PANKAJ
PANKAJ SHARMA
SHARMA Date:
2025.05.05
13:19:19 +0530
9% per annum from the date of filing of DAR i.e.13/06/2022.
Since no interim compensation has been awarded, therefore no
deduction is applicable.
RELEASE IN CASE NO. 538/22 (For Grant of
Compensation inrespect of the death of deceased Sandeep
Kumar Verma ):
30. Petitioners did not bother to appear before this
Tribunal for recording their statements regarding financial needs
and requirements.
30.1 Out of the awarded amount, Petitioner No. 1 is
awarded a sum of Rs.60,600/-( Rupees Sixty Thousand Six
Hundred Only). The entire awarded 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 her
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
no. 1.
30.2 Out of the awarded amount, Petitioner No. 2 is
awarded a sum of Rs.20,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty 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 100 monthly fixed deposit receipts (FDRs) payable in
equal amounts for a period of 1 to 100 months in succession, as
per the scheme formulated by Central Motor Vehicles (fifth
MACT No. 538/22 Basant Ram Verma & Ors. Vs. Devinder Giri & Ors. Page No. 21/33
MACT No. 539/22 Anil Kumar @ Anil Gupta Vs. Devinder Giri & Ors. Digitally signed
by PANKAJ
PANKAJ SHARMA
SHARMA Date:
2025.05.05
13:19:24 +0530
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 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.2,71,241/- (Rupees
Two Lakhs Seventy One Thousand Two Hundred and Forty One
Only ) is also directed to be released into her above said account,
which can be withdrawn and utilized by the Petitioner no. 2.
RELEASE IN CASE NO. 539/22 (For Grant of
Compensation in respect of the injuries sustained by injured
Anil Kumar @ Anil Gupta):
31. Injured Anil Kumar @ Anil Gupta did not bother to
appear before this Tribunal for recording his statement regarding
financial needs and requirements.
31.1 Out of the awarded amount, injured Anil Kumar @
Anil Gupta is awarded a sum of Rs.77,093/ ( Rupees Seventy
Seven Thousand and Ninety Three Only). The entire awarded
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
MACT No. 538/22 Basant Ram Verma & Ors. Vs. Devinder Giri & Ors. Page No. 22/33
MACT No. 539/22 Anil Kumar @ Anil Gupta Vs. Devinder Giri & Ors. Digitally signed
by PANKAJ
PANKAJ SHARMA
SHARMA Date:
2025.05.05
13:19:29 +0530
by the injured Anil Gupta.
LIABILITY
32. Since, the vehicle bearing registration no.
DL-1LJ-7382 (Champion) was uninsured and as such the aspect
of liability has to be considered. As per record R-2/ Sh. Sanjay
Kumar Giri has sold the aforesaid vehicle to Vikash Bharti and
Vikas Bharti sold to Dalip Kumar. Dalip Kumar Sold it to
Sikander @ Ekhlakh and Sikander @ Ekhlakh sold to R-1/
Devinder Giri. R-1/ Devinder Giri is the driver-cum-owner of the
offening vehicle bearing registration no. DL-1LJ-7382
(Champion) is liable to pay the awarded amount of
compensation to petitioners/ injured. R-1/ Devinder Giri 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 petitioners/ injured 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 till the deposit of the compensation as
awarded, failing which he shall be liable to pay interest at the
MACT No. 538/22 Basant Ram Verma & Ors. Vs. Devinder Giri & Ors. Page No. 23/33
MACT No. 539/22 Anil Kumar @ Anil Gupta Vs. Devinder Giri & Ors.
Digitally signed
PANKAJ by PANKAJ
SHARMA
SHARMA Date: 2025.05.05
13:19:34 +0530
rate of 12% per annum for the period of delay.
33. 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).
34. 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.
35. 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. 538/22 Basant Ram Verma & Ors. Vs. Devinder Giri & Ors. Page No. 24/33
MACT No. 539/22 Anil Kumar @ Anil Gupta Vs. Devinder Giri & Ors. Digitally signed
by PANKAJ
PANKAJ SHARMA
Date:
SHARMA 2025.05.05
13:19:38
+0530
File be consigned to Record Room.
A separate file be prepared for compliance report
Digitally signed by
and put up the same on 05.06.2025. PANKAJ PANKAJ SHARMA
SHARMA Date: 2025.05.05
13:19:42 +0530Announced in the open court (DR. PANKAJ SHARMA
On this 05.05.2025 Judge, MACT-02 (CENTRAL)
Delhi/05/05/2025
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. : 10.01.2022
2. Name of the deceased : Sandeep Kumar
Verma
3. Age of the deceased : 24 years
4. Occupation of the deceased : Driver
5. Income of the deceased : Assessed on the
basis of
Minimum Wages of
a skilled person
prevailing in UP at
the relevant timeMACT No. 538/22 Basant Ram Verma & Ors. Vs. Devinder Giri & Ors. Page No. 25/33
MACT No. 539/22 Anil Kumar @ Anil Gupta Vs. Devinder Giri & Ors. Digitally signed
PANKAJ by PANKAJ
SHARMA
SHARMA Date: 2025.05.05
13:19:46 +0530
6. Name, age and relationship of legal representative of
deceased:-
S. No. Name Age Relation
(1) Basant Ram Verma 52 Years Father of the
deceased
(2) Yashoda Devi 46 years Mother of the
deceased
Computation of Compensation
Sr. No. Heads Awarded by the Claims
Tribunal
7. Income of the Rs. 11,316.16/- per month
deceased(A)
8. Add-Future Prospects 40%
(B)
9. Less-Personal One half deduction has been
expenses of the done
deceased(C)
MACT No. 538/22 Basant Ram Verma & Ors. Vs. Devinder Giri & Ors. Page No. 26/33
MACT No. 539/22 Anil Kumar @ Anil Gupta Vs. Devinder Giri & Ors. Digitally signed
by PANKAJ
PANKAJ SHARMA
SHARMA Date:
2025.05.05
13:19:50 +0530
10. Monthly loss of Rs. 13,631.10/-
dependency[(A+B)-
C=D]
11. Annual loss of Rs.1,63,573.20/-
dependency (Dx12)
12. Multiplier(E) '18'
13. Total loss of Rs.17,11,003/- (rounded off)
dependency
(Dx12xE= F)
14. Medical Expenses(G) NIL
15. Compensation for loss Rs. 96,000/- ( Rs. 48,000X2)
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. 538/22 Basant Ram Verma & Ors. Vs. Devinder Giri & Ors. Page No. 27/33
MACT No. 539/22 Anil Kumar @ Anil Gupta Vs. Devinder Giri & Ors. Digitally signed
by PANKAJ
PANKAJ SHARMA
SHARMA Date:
2025.05.05
13:19:55 +0530
expenses(K)
19.
TOTAL Rs.18,47,003/-
COMPENSATION(F
+G+H+I+J+K=L)
20.
RATE OF INTEREST 9%
AWARDED
21.
Interest amount up to Rs.4,84,838/-(rounded off)
the date of award(M)
22.
Total amount Rs.23,31,841/-
including interest(L +
M)
23.
Award amount P-1 : Rs.60,600/-
released
P-2 : Rs.2,71,241/-
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. 538/22 Basant Ram Verma & Ors. Vs. Devinder Giri & Ors. Page No. 28/33
MACT No. 539/22 Anil Kumar @ Anil Gupta Vs. Devinder Giri & Ors. Digitally signed
PANKAJ by PANKAJ
SHARMA
SHARMA Date: 2025.05.05
13:20:00 +0530
26.
Next date for 05/06/2025
compliance of the
award
FORM – XVI, Central Motor Vehicles (fifth Amendment) Rules,
2022 (Pl. see Rule 150A) SUMMARY OF THE
COMPUTATION OF AWARD AMOUNT IN INJURY CASE
1. Date of accident : 10.01.2022
2. Name of the injured : Sh. Anil Kumar @
Anil Gupta
3. Age of the injured : 34 Years
4. Occupation of the injured : Self Employed
5. Income of the injured : As per minimum
wages prevailing in
Delhi at the relevant
time for an
Un-skilled Person
6. Nature of injury : Simple
7. Medical treatment taken : Government
Hospital
8. Period of Hospitalization : NIL
9. Whether any permanent disability ?
If yes, give details : NIL
MACT No. 538/22 Basant Ram Verma & Ors. Vs. Devinder Giri & Ors. Page No. 29/33
MACT No. 539/22 Anil Kumar @ Anil Gupta Vs. Devinder Giri & Ors. Digitally signed
by PANKAJ
PANKAJ SHARMA
Date:
SHARMA 2025.05.05
13:20:04
+0530
10. Computation of Compensation
S. No. Heads Awarded by the Tribunal
11. Pecuniary Loss
(i) Expenditure on treatment NIL
(ii) Expenditure on conveyance Rs. 5,000/-
(iii) Expenditure on special diet Rs. 5,000/-
(iv) Cost of nursing/attendant Rs.5,000/-
(v) Cost of artificial limb NIL
(vi) Loss of earning capacity NIL
(vii) Loss of Income Rs.16,064/-
(viii) Any other loss which may NIL
require any special
treatment or aid to the
injured for the rest of his
life
MACT No. 538/22 Basant Ram Verma & Ors. Vs. Devinder Giri & Ors. Page No. 30/33
MACT No. 539/22 Anil Kumar @ Anil Gupta Vs. Devinder Giri & Ors. Digitally signed
by PANKAJ
PANKAJ SHARMA
SHARMA Date:
2025.05.05
13:20:07 +0530
12. Non-Pecunicary Loss:
(i) Compensation for mental NIL
and physical shock
(ii) Pain and suffering Rs. 25,000/-
(iii) Loss of amenities of life NIL
(iv) Disfiguration NIL
(v) Loss of marriage prospects NIL
(vi) Discomfort, Inconvenience NIL
and Loss of earnings to the
Parents during the period of
hospitalization
13. Disability resulting in loss of earning capacity:
(I) Percentage of disability NA
assessed and nature of
disability as permanent or
temporary
MACT No. 538/22 Basant Ram Verma & Ors. Vs. Devinder Giri & Ors. Page No. 31/33
MACT No. 539/22 Anil Kumar @ Anil Gupta Vs. Devinder Giri & Ors. Digitally signed
by PANKAJ
PANKAJ SHARMA
SHARMA Date:
2025.05.05
13:20:11 +0530
(ii) Loss of amenities or loss of N.A
expectation of life span on
account of disability
N.A.
(iii) Percentage of loss of
earning capacity in relation
to disability
(iv) Loss of future income - N.A.
(Income x% Earning
Capacity x Multiplier)
14. TOTAL COMPENSATION Rs.61,064/-
15. INTEREST AWARDED 9% per annum
16. Interest amount up to the Rs.16,0629/-(rounded off)
date of award
17. Total amount including Rs.77,093/-
interest
18. Award amount released Entire
MACT No. 538/22 Basant Ram Verma & Ors. Vs. Devinder Giri & Ors. Page No. 32/33
MACT No. 539/22 Anil Kumar @ Anil Gupta Vs. Devinder Giri & Ors. Digitally signed
PANKAJ by PANKAJ
SHARMA
SHARMA Date: 2025.05.05
13:20:15 +0530
19. Award amount kept in As per award
FDRs
20. Mode of disbursement of Mentioned in the award
the award amount to the
petitioners(s).
21. Next date for compliance 05/06/2025
of the award.
CONCLUSION:-
1. As per award dated 05.05.2025.
2. A separate file was ordered to be prepared by the Nazir
with directions to put up the same on 05.06.2025.
Digitally signed
PANKAJ by PANKAJ
SHARMA
SHARMA Date: 2025.05.05
13:20:18 +0530
(DR. PANKAJ SHARMA)
PO MACT-02 (CENTRAL)
DELHI/05/05/2025
MACT No. 538/22 Basant Ram Verma & Ors. Vs. Devinder Giri & Ors. Page No. 33 /33
Digitally signed
MACT No. 539/22 Anil Kumar @ Anil Gupta Vs. Devinder Giri & Ors. PANKAJ by PANKAJ
SHARMA
SHARMA Date:
2025.05.05
13:20:23 +0530
