Jagdish Vs. Ravi Kumar and ors.

Jagdish vs Ravi Kumar and ors.

Type Court Judgment Court Delhi Decided Apr 21, 2010

~5 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/848716

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/848716
Court: Delhi High Court
Judge: J.R. Midha, J.
Decided On: Apr 21, 2010
Case Number: MAC.APP. No. 117/2004
Subject: Motor Vehicles

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

- What remains to be seen is as to whether Pinki died an un-natural death within seven years of her marriage and whether her death was attributable to the demand of dowry and further whether she was dealt with cruelty soon before her death. If these ingredients are proved by the prosecution then the conviction of th...

Key legal issue: Motor Vehicles

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Jagdish

Advocate O.P. Mannie, Adv.

Respondent

Ravi Kumar and ors.

Advocate Mirza Aslam Beg, Adv. for Sonia Sharma, Adv. for R-3

Legal References

Cases Referred: Sat Prakash v. Jagdish

Excerpt

- what remains to be seen is as to whether pinki died an un-natural death within seven years of her marriage and whether her death was attributable to the demand of dowry and further whether she was dealt with cruelty soon before her death. if these ingredients are proved by the prosecution then the conviction of the accused under section 304b, ipc will be complete.[para 9] the question is, in the absence of corpus delicti, could it be presumed that the accused persons alone were responsible for the death of pinki. we must hasten to add here that the accused persons have already been acquitted of the murder charge. [para 9] it is clear that pinki's death was caused because of the burns and not in the normal circumstances. the finding of the trial court and the appellate court in that behalf is correct. for this reason we are not impressed by the argument of the learned counsel that in the absence of corpus delicti, the conviction could not stand. [para10] it is clear that the prosecution has not only proved the offence under section 304b, ipc with the aid of section 113b, indian evidence act but also the offence under section 201, ipc. [para 15] held: we have gone through the judgments of the trial court as well as the appellate court carefully and we find that both the courts have fully considered all the aspects of this matter. we, therefore, find nothing wrong with the judgments and confirm the same. the appeal is, therefore, dismissed.[para 16].....a period of one year with cumulative interest.(ii) fixed deposit in respect of 25% of the amount for a period of two years with cumulative interest.(iii) fixed deposit in respect of 25% of the amount for a period of three years with cumulative interest.11. the bank shall issue fixed deposit pass book instead of the fdrs to the appellant and the maturity amount of the fdrs be automatically credited to the saving bank account of the beneficiary at the end of the fdr.12. no loan, advance or withdrawal shall be allowed on the said fixed deposit receipts without the permission of this court.13. on the request of the appellant, the bank shall transfer the savings account to any other branch according to the convenience of the appellant.14. the appellant 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.15. copy of the order be given dasti to counsel for both the parties under the signatures of the court master.16. 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.

Full Judgment

J.R. Midha, J.

1. The appellant has challenged the award of the learned Tribunal whereby compensation of Rs. 54,000/- has been awarded to the appellant. The appellant seeks enhancement of the award amount.

2. The accident dated 28th November, 1995 resulted in grievous injuries to the appellant. The appellant suffered fracture of nasal bone. The appellant had to undergo surgery of nasal bone on which he spent Rs. 43,000/-. The appellant remained under treatment for more than two months.

3. The Claims Tribunal has awarded Rs. 43,000/- towards medical expenditure, Rs. 4,000/- for loss of income for two months, Rs. 5,000/- towards pain and suffering and Rs. 2,000/- for conveyance and special diet. The total compensation awarded is Rs. 54,000/-.

4. The learned Counsel for the appellant urged following grounds at the time of hearing of this appeal:

(i) The compensation for loss of income be awarded for four months.

(ii) The compensation for pain and suffering be enhanced.

(iii) Compensation for loss of amenities of life and disfiguration be awarded.

(iv) The rate of interest be enhanced from 6% to 7.5% per annum.

5. Considering the nature of injuries suffered by the appellant, the compensation for pain and suffering is enhanced from Rs. 5,000/- to Rs. 25,000/-. The Claims Tribunal has not awarded any compensation for loss of amenities of life and disfiguration. Rs. 25,000/- is awarded for loss of amenities of life and disfiguration. The Claims Tribunal has awarded only Rs. 4,000/- towards loss of income for two months. The claimant could not attend his work for four months and, therefore, the compensation for loss of income is enhanced from Rs. 4,000/- to Rs. 8,000/-. The compensation towards the medial expenditure, conveyance and special diet does not call for any interference and is upheld. The Claims Tribunal has awarded interest @ 6% per annum which is enhanced to 7.5% per annum following the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Dharampal and Ors. v. U.P. State Road Transport Corporation III 2008 ACC (1) SC.

6. The claimant is entitled to total compensation of Rs. 1,03,000/- (Rs. 43,000/- towards medical expenditure, Rs. 8,000/- towards loss of income for four months, Rs. 25,000/- towards pain and suffering, Rs. 25,000/- towards loss of amenities of life and disfiguration and Rs. 2,000/-towards conveyance and special diet).

7. The appeal is allowed with costs. The award amount is enhanced from Rs. 54,000/- to Rs. 1,03,000/- along with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till realization. The cost of the appeal is assessed at Rs. 10,000/-.

8. After making the payment of the award amount, respondent No. 3 shall be entitled to recover the same from respondent No. 2.

9. The enhanced award amount along with up to date interest be deposited by respondent No. 3 with UCO Bank A/c Jagdish, Delhi High Court Branch within 30 days. The cost of Rs. 10,000/- of this appeal be deposited by respondent No. 3 by means of separate cheque in the name of O.P. Mannie, Advocate along with the deposit of the enhanced award amount. In view of the judgment of this Court in Sat Prakash v. Jagdish FAO. No. 365/1999 decided on 26th March, 2010, the legal fee of the Counsel for respondent No. 3 be also deposited with UCO Bank by means of a separate cheque in the name of Ms. Sonia Sharma, Advocate.

10. Upon the aforesaid deposit being made, the UCO Bank is directed to release 25% of the amount to the appellant by transferring the same to his Saving Bank Account. The remaining amount be kept in the name of the appellant in fixed deposit in the following manner:

(i) Fixed deposit in respect of 25% of the amount for a period of one year with cumulative interest.

(ii) Fixed deposit in respect of 25% of the amount for a period of two years with cumulative interest.

(iii) Fixed deposit in respect of 25% of the amount for a period of three years with cumulative interest.

11. The Bank shall issue Fixed Deposit Pass Book instead of the FDRs to the appellant and the maturity amount of the FDRs be automatically credited to the Saving Bank Account of the beneficiary at the end of the FDR.

12. No loan, advance or withdrawal shall be allowed on the said fixed deposit receipts without the permission of this Court.

13. On the request of the appellant, the Bank shall transfer the Savings Account to any other branch according to the convenience of the appellant.

14. The appellant 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.

15. Copy of the order be given dasti to Counsel for both the parties under the signatures of the Court Master.

16. 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.

Same Court & Year Delhi · 2010 Same Parties Jagdish vs Ravi Kumar and ors. Same Subject Motor Vehicles Same Judge J.R. Midha, J.

Motor Vehicles