Reliance General Insurance Co. ... vs Sushila Rathi & Ors.
2012 Latest Caselaw 6909 Del

$ 17
*    IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

                                       Date of decision: 4th December, 2012
+        MAC. APP. 927/2012

         RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.         ..... Appellant
                      Through: Mr. Sameer Nandwani, Advocate.


                        Versus


         SUSHILA RATHI & ORS.                               ..... Respondents
                       Through:          None

         CORAM:
         HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL

                                 JUDGMENT

G. P. MITTAL, J. (ORAL)

1. The Appellant Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd. impugns a judgment dated 10.07.2012 whereby a compensation of `12,83,077/- was awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (the Claims Tribunal) in favour of respondents. by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal(the Claims Tribunal) for the death of Ramesh Chander in a motor vehicle accident which occurred on 23.05.2008.

2. The sole contention raised by the learned counsel for the Appellant is that deceased Ramesh Chander @ Ramesh Rathi met with the accident on 23.05.2008. He died on 12.08.2008. The Respondents(Claimants) failed to produce any evidence that death was on account of the injuries suffered in the accident.

3. Immediately after the accident, the deceased was removed to Ayushman Hospital & Trauma Centre, Hero Honda Chowk, Gurgaon(Ex.PW1/1). He was referred to All India Institute of Medical Sciences(AIIMS) because of the serious injuries of pelvis right and fracture right pubic rami apart from various other injuries. The deceased was then admitted in PGI Medical College, Rohtak where he remained admitted from 24.05.2008 to 02.07.2008. He received some treatment from Mata Chanan Devi Hospital, Janakpuri and was then readmitted in PGI Medical College, Rohtak on 10.08.2008 and succumbed to his injuries on 12.08.2008.

4. Sushila Rathi, the deceased's widow filed her affidavit Ex.PW1/A and entered the witness box as PW1. She deposed about the serious injuries suffered by the deceased and the treatment received by him at various Hospitals, that is, Ayushman Hospital & Trauma Centre, Gurgaon, AIIMS, Delhi, PGI Medical College, Rohtak, Mata Chanan Devi Hospital, Janakpuri, Apollo Hospital and again PGI Medical College, Rohtak. Her testimony that the deceased succumbed to the injuries suffered in the accident was not challenged in cross-examination. Various documents proved on record including Ex.PW6/A shows that there was infected wound right anterolateral thigh and right gluteal region. It appears that this wound could not be healed in spite of successive debridement of the wound and heavy doses of antibiotics. Although, post mortem examination was not conducted in this case as the deceased died couple of months after the accident, yet from the medical record coupled with PW1's unchallenged testimony, it is established that the deceased died on account of the injuries suffered in the accident.

5. The Appellant's plea that there was no nexus between the injury and the death cannot be accepted.

6. The Appeal is devoid of any merit; the same is accordingly dismissed in limine.

7. Statutory amount of `25,000/-, if any, shall be refunded to the Appellant Insurance Company.

8. Pending Applications stand disposed of.

(G.P. MITTAL) JUDGE DECEMBER 04, 2012 pst