Veermati & Ors vs Sanjay & Ors

$~3 & 4
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

nd
Date of decision: 22 May 2026.
%
+ MAC.APP. 793/2013
VEERMATI & ORS .....Appellant
Through: Mr. Anshuman Bal and Ms.
Aastha Chauhan, Advs.
versus
SANJAY & ORS .....Respondent
Through: Mr. P.S Singh, CGSC, with Ms.
Annu Singh, Ms. Shivangi
Sharma, Mr. Aditya Tomar,
Advocates with Mr. Ajay Pal,
Law Officer for respondent.

+ MAC.APP. 815/2013
SANJAY KUMAR & ORS .....Appellant
Through: Mr. P.S Singh, CGSC, with Ms.
Annu Singh, Ms. Shivangi
Sharma, Mr. Aditya Tomar,
Advocates with Mr. Ajay Pal,
Law Officer for respondent.
versus
SMT VEERMATI DEVI .....Respondent
Through: Mr. Anshuman Bal and Ms.
Aastha Chauhan, Advs.

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANISH DAYAL
JUDGMENT
%

ANISH DAYAL, J :(ORAL)
1. These are cross-appeals, being MAC.APP. 815/2013 , which have
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:RAHUL
KUMAR CHOUDHARY
Signing Date:02.06.2026
16:18:33
MAC. APP. 793/2013 & MAC. APP. 815/2013 Page 1 of 6

been filed by Sanjay Kumar , the driver of the offending vehicle, which
was operated by Central Reserve Police Force (‘ CRPF ’) and MAC.APP.
793/2013 , which has been filed by the claimant, seeking enhancement of
compensation. The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (‘ MACT ’),
st
Dwarka Courts, New Delhi, by impugned judgment dated 01 April
2013, awarded compensation of Rs. 8,14,829/- along with interest @
7.5% per annum.
2. The CRPF is represented through Mr. P. S. Singh , CGSC , who
submits that the involvement of the offending vehicle in the accident
itself is in question.
rd
3. The accident occurred on 03 November 2007, when Virender
Kumar Vashisht @ Virender Kumar , the deceased, was proceeding to
Bahadurgarh on his motorcycle. When at about 06:45 p.m. near
Jharoda, Najafgarh Road , a CRPF bus bearing no. UP-16G-0142, driven
by Sanjay Kumar , allegedly dashed against the motorcyclist as a result of
which deceased fell down on the road and received fatal injuries. Later
he was moved to RTRM Hospital, where he was declared as ‘ brought
dead ’.
4. The MACT while deciding whether the death had occurred due to
the negligence of the offending vehicle, relied on testimonies of PW3
and PW5 , the two eyewitnesses. PW3 , Nikhil Kumar, narrated the
sequence of the accident, as well as PW5 , Devender Kumar . The
sequence of events have been narrated in their testimonies in detail and
they have also been cross-examined by counsel for CRPF; however, they
have sustained their testimonies despite cross- examination.
5. Mr. Singh , stated that there are contradictions in the testimonies of
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:RAHUL
KUMAR CHOUDHARY
Signing Date:02.06.2026
16:18:33
MAC. APP. 793/2013 & MAC. APP. 815/2013 Page 2 of 6

PW3 and PW5. While PW3 stated that the bus was grey in colour, on
contrary, PW5 stated that it was blue in colour. While this may be an
issue of improper description and subjectivity, the rest of the testimony
is consistent in identifying the vehicle.
6. Further, Mr. Singh states that statements to the police were given
approximately 10 days after the accident. However, it is stated by the
witnesses that they had noted the number and they later went to the
police to record their statement.
7. Mr. Singh , has further submitted that the accused has been
discharged in the criminal proceedings and has produced the discharge
order. The Court has perused the discharge order, as presented, even
though it is not a part of appeal proceedings, and notes that both the
witnesses PW3 and PW5 , had turned hostile to the case of prosecution.
8. In this regard, even though, the criminal proceedings may
otherwise influence the finding of MACT on preponderance of
probability, the retraction by two eye-witnesses cannot be taken as
persuasive or determinative for the assessment of negligence both having
given credible testimonies before the MACT.
9. Accordingly, the plea of appellant/CRPF, and driver is therefore,
rejected.
10. In the appeal for enhancement, Mr. Bal , counsel for claimant, has
been sought realignment on the basis of the principles enunciated in
National Insurance Company v. Pranay Sethi & Ors . (2017) 16 SCC
680:

(i) Funeral expenses ought to be Rs. 15,000/- ;
(ii) Loss of estate ought to be Rs. 15,000/- ;
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:RAHUL
KUMAR CHOUDHARY
Signing Date:02.06.2026
16:18:33
MAC. APP. 793/2013 & MAC. APP. 815/2013 Page 3 of 6

(iii) Loss of love and affection stands deleted as per judgment of
United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Satinder Kaur , (2021) 11
SCC 780
(iv) Loss of consortium ought to be Rs. 40,000/-, as there is only
one claimant.
(v) Multiplier ought to be ‘ 17’ , as per the age of deceased and
not ‘ 13’ as per the age of mother.
11. As regards loss of dependency, the salary has been assessed by
the Tribunal by excluding transport allowance. As per the Supreme
Court’s decision in Meenakshi v. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., 2024
SCC OnLine SC 1872 , transport allowance cannot be deducted. The
relevant paragraphs of Meenakshi ( supra ) are extracted as under:
th
“9. Recently in a judgment dated 11 July, 2024
in National Insurance Company Ltd. v. Nalini [Petition
for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No. 4230/2019], this
Court held that, allowances under the heads of
transport allowance, house rent allowance, provident
fund loan, provident fund and special allowance ought
to be added while considering the basic salary of the
victim/deceased to arrive at the dependency factor.”

(emphasis added)

12. Accordingly, the salary including transport allowance is assessed
at Rs. 10,002/- on which future prospects at 40% shall be granted,
considering that the deceased was 27 years of age on the date of the
accident. Considering the age of deceased, multiplier of ‘ 17 ’ shall be
applied in terms of principal enunciated in Pranay Sethi ( supra ).

13. Accordingly, the revised computation is as under:
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:RAHUL
KUMAR CHOUDHARY
Signing Date:02.06.2026
16:18:33
MAC. APP. 793/2013 & MAC. APP. 815/2013 Page 4 of 6

S.no. Heads of Compensation Awarded by the
Tribunal
Awarded by
this Court
1. Income of deceased (A) Rs. 7,592/- Rs. 10,002/-
2. Add: Future Prospects (B) Rs. 2277.60/- Rs. 4,008/-
3. Less: Personal expenses of the
Rs. 4,934.80/- Rs. 7,002/-
deceased (C)
4. Monthly Loss of Dependency (A+B-
Rs. 4,934.80/- Rs. 7,008/-
C=D)
5. Annual loss of dependency (D x
Rs. 59,217.60/- Rs.84,096/-/-
12=E)
6. Multiplier (F) 13 17
7. Total loss of dependency (E x F = G) Rs. 7,69,828.80/- Rs. 14,29,632/-
8. Compensation for loss of consortium
Nil Rs. 40,000/-
(H)
9. Compensation for loss of estate (I) Rs. 10,000/- Rs. 15,000/-
10. Compensation towards funeral
Rs. 10,000/- Rs. 15,000/-
expenses (J)
11. Loss of love and affection Rs. 25,000/- Nil
12. Total compensation
Rs. 8,14,829/- Rs. 14,99,632/-
(G+H+I+J = K)
13. Rate of Interest Awarded 7.5% Rs. 7.5%

14. The compensation is enhanced by Rs. 6,84,803/-.
nd
15. By order dated 02 September 2013, the Court had directed
deposit of the entire amount of compensation along with up-to date
interest with the Registrar General of this Court. Further, direction for
release of 50% of the awarded amount was passed.
16. It is directed that the balance amount along with accrued interest
deposited with Registrar General of this Court be released to the
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:RAHUL
KUMAR CHOUDHARY
Signing Date:02.06.2026
16:18:33
MAC. APP. 793/2013 & MAC. APP. 815/2013 Page 5 of 6

claimant as per the directions of the MACT in the impugned award.
17. It is directed that the enhanced amount along with 7.5% interest be
deposited with the Registrar General of this Court within a period of four
weeks. It is directed that a lump sum amount of Rs. 2,00,000/- shall be
released to the claimant from the deposit of enhanced amount within a
period of two weeks thereafter. Remaining enhanced amount, along with
accrued interest, shall be kept in Fixed Deposit Receipts ( FDRs ) of Rs.
15,000/- each for periods of 1 month, 2 months, 3 months and so on, in
succession as maybe calculated. Interest accruing on said FDRs shall be
credited to the designated Savings Bank Account of claimant. The
amount of FDRs on maturity would be released to the Savings Bank
Account of claimant upon due verification.
18. The appeals stand disposed of in above terms. Pending
applications (if any) are rendered infructuous.
19. Statutory deposit, if any, shall be refunded to appellate/Insurance
Company only upon deposit of the enhanced amount along with the
accrued interest.
20. Judgement be uploaded on the website of this Court.

(ANISH DAYAL)
JUDGE
MAY 22, 2026/RK/ sp
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:RAHUL
KUMAR CHOUDHARY
Signing Date:02.06.2026
16:18:33
MAC. APP. 793/2013 & MAC. APP. 815/2013 Page 6 of 6