Delhi High Court
National Insurance Company Ltd. vs Raj Kumari & Ors. on 4 June, 2010
Author: J.R. Midha
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ MAC.APP.350/2007
Date of reserve: 26th March, 2010
% Date of Decision: 4th June, 2010
NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. ..... Appellants
Through : Ms. Manjusha Wadhwa, Adv.
versus
RAJ KUMARI & ORS. .....Respondents
Through : Ms. Hemangi Saikia, Adv. for
Respondent No.1.
Mr. Deepak Aggaral, Proxy
Counsel for R-7
CORAM :-
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.R. MIDHA
1. Whether Reporters of Local papers may YES
be allowed to see the Judgment?
2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? YES
3. Whether the judgment should be YES
reported in the Digest?
JUDGMENT
1. The appellants have challenged the award of the learned
Tribunal whereby compensation of Rs.4,30,000/- has been
awarded to the claimants/respondents No.1 to 5.
2. The accident dated 25th/26th September, 2003 resulted in
the death of Daksh Kumar. The deceased was travelling in
Truck bearing No.HR-55A-9393 which met with an accident
with another truck bearing No.HR-38D-6701. The deceased
was survived by his widow, three daughters and one son, who
filed the claim petition before the learned Tribunal.
3. The deceased was aged 35 years at the time of the
accident and was working as a motor mechanic earning
Rs.4,500/- per month. In the absence of proof of income, the
learned Tribunal took the minimum wages of Rs.3,000/- per
month, deducted 1/3 towards personal expenses of the
deceased and applied the multiplier of 16 to compute the loss
of dependency at Rs.3,85,000/-. Rs.5,000/- have been
awarded towards medical expenses, Rs.10,000/- towards pain
and suffering, Rs.20,000/- towards loss of love and affection,
Rs.5,000/- towards funeral expenses and Rs.5,000/- towards
loss of estate. The total compensation awarded is
Rs.4,30,000/-.
4. The learned counsel for the appellants has urged the
following grounds at the time of hearing of this appeal:-
(i) The driver of the offending vehicle was holding a
fake driving licence at the time of the accident.
(ii) The deceased was a gratuitous passenger in the
offending vehicle and, therefore, the appellant is
not liable.
5. With respect to the driving licence, respondent No.2
examined the its Director as R2W1 who deposed that the
driving licence No.1/410/MTR/98 was initially issued on 22nd
December, 1998 for motorcycle plus light motor vehicles and
was thereafter endorsed for heavy transport vehicle on 6th
April, 2010 in the name of Son Pal. The driving licence was
valid upto 5th April, 2007. The verification report was
exhibited as Ex.R2W2/1.
6. The appellant examined Licencing Clerk, DTO, Gurgaon
as RW-3 who deposed that driving licence No.1023/G/02 in the
name of Rajbir Singh was not issued by their office. The
photocopy of the driving licence was marked as R3W1/1. The
appellant also examined its Assistant as RW-3 who proved the
investigation report as Ex.R3W2/2.
7. The Claims Tribunal considered the evidence of the
appellant as well as the respondent No.7 and held that the
driver of the offending vehicle was holding a valid driving
licence to drive the HTV issued by Mathura Authority and
there is no ground for avoiding the liability by the appellant.
The appellant did not led any evidence with respect to driving
licence No.1/410/MTR/98 proved by R2W1 and, therefore, the
finding of the Claims Tribunal holding that the driver was
holding a valid driving licence is correct and is upheld.
8. The second ground raised by the appellant is that the
deceased was a gratuitous passenger in the offending vehicle.
The appellant has also not led any evidence to prove the
same and, therefore, the plea of the appellant is rejected.
9. The deceased was a labourer and is survived by the
claimants who are widow, three daughters and one son. The
claimants were examined by this Court on 26th February,
2010. Respondent No.1 is a daily wager and respondents
No.2 to 5 are minor children. The respondents are staying in
a rented accommodation on a monthly rent of Rs.1,000/- and
their condition has been found to be very pathetic. This case
relates to the accident dated 25th/26th September, 2003 in
respect of which the claim petition was filed on 12th February,
2004 and the claimants are without compensation despite
lapse of more than six years after the accident.
10. For all the aforesaid reasons, the appeal is dismissed.
11. The appellant has deposited the entire award amount
with UCO Bank in terms of order dated 28th January, 2010 and
the said amount is lying in fixed deposit.
12. UCO Bank is directed to release 10% of the amount to
respondent No.1 by transferring the same to her savings bank
account. The remaining amount be kept in the fixed deposit
in the following manner:-
(i) Fixed deposit in respect of 10% of the amount in
the name of respondent No.1 for a period of one
year.
(ii) Fixed deposit in respect of 10% of the amount in
the name of respondent No.1 for a period of two
years.
(iii) Fixed deposit in respect of 10% of the amount in
the name of respondent No.1 for a period of three
years.
(iv) Fixed deposit in respect of 10% of the amount in
the name of respondent No.1 for a period of four
years.
(v) Fixed deposit in respect of 10% of the amount in
the name of respondent No.1 for a period of five
years.
(vi) Fixed deposit in respect of 10% of the amount in
the name of respondent No.2 for a period of six
years.
(vii) Fixed deposit in respect of 10% of the amount in
the name of respondent No.3 for a period of seven
years.
(viii) Fixed deposit in respect of 10% of the amount in
the name of respondent No.4 for a period of eight
years.
(ix) Fixed deposit in respect of 10% of the amount in
the name of respondent No.5 for a period of nine
years.
13. The interest on the aforesaid fixed deposits of appellants
shall be paid monthly by automatic credit of interest in the
Savings Account of appellant No.1.
14. Withdrawal from the aforesaid account of appellant No.1
shall be permitted after due verification and the Bank shall
issue photo Identity Card to appellants No.1 to facilitate
identity.
15. No cheque book be issued to appellant No.1 without the
permission of this Court.
16. The Bank shall issue Fixed Deposit Pass Book instead of
the FDRs to the appellants and the maturity amount of the
FDRs be automatically credited to the Saving Bank Account of
the beneficiary at the end of the FDR.
17. No loan, advance or withdrawal shall be allowed on the
said fixed deposit receipts without the permission of this
Court.
18. Half yearly statement of account be filed by the Bank in
this Court.
19. On the request of appellants, the Bank shall transfer the
Savings Account to any other branch according to the
convenience of appellants.
20. The appellants shall furnish all the relevant documents
for opening of the Saving Bank Account and Fixed Deposit
Account to Mr. M.M. Tandon, Member-Retail Team, UCO Bank
Zonal, Parliament Street, New Delhi.
21. The appellant is directed to disclose on affidavit within
four weeks whether the statutory amount of Rs.25,000/- has
been adjusted while depositing the award amount. If the
statutory amount has been so adjusted, the same be
transferred to UCO Bank and the UCO Bank is directed to
release the said amount to respondent No.1. On the other
hand, if the statutory amount has not been adjusted, it may
be refunded to the appellant through counsel. If the appellant
fails to file the affidavit within four weeks, the Registry shall
put up the matter before Court on 5th July, 2010 for directions
along with the calculation by the Accounts Department.
22. Copy of the order be given dasti to counsel for both the
parties under the signatures of the Court Master.
23. Copy of this order be also sent to Mr. M.M. Tandon,
Member-Retail Team, UCO Bank Zonal, Parliament Street, New
Delhi (Mobile No. 09310356400) through the UCO Bank, High
Court Branch under the signature of Court Master.
J.R. MIDHA, J
June 4, 2010
s.pal
