Claims Tribunal Agreed Procedure in terms of the order dated 15th December, 2017 is further modified to incorporate the directions companytained in orders dated 18th January, 2018, 09th March, 2018, 01st May, 2018, 20th July, 2018 and 07th September, 2018.
This exposes him to the risk of another fracture anytime.
The appellant, thereafter, preferred a review petition under Order LXVII Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure seeking review of the judgment dated 17 th May, 2016 rendered by the High Court.
This Court appreciates the assistance rendered by Mr. Lalit Bhasin, learned companynsel for Indian Bank Association for implementation of MACAD Scheme.
The appellant filed an application claiming companypensation before Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal MACT , Muzaffarnagar, U.P. as the accident took place in the area within the jurisdiction of the said MACT.
The appellant filed the appeal thereagainst before the High Court.
In all, three surgeries were performed.
This disability is certified by the District Government Hospital, Muzaffarnagar at 40, as per the disability certificate dated 10 th December, 2005 Exh.
Main judgment dated 17th May, 2016 as well as order dated 19th May, 2017 passed in review petition are the subject matters of the present appeals.
He was rushed to the hospital and his hospitalization companytinued for over two months.
He was still a student.
However, when the accident took place he was number working having number accepted the said offer.
He had to undergo surgery for which he was Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by ASHWANI KUMAR Date 2019.03.05 operated on 31st May, 1988.
50,000/ on this account, given the nature of disability and physical disfigurement suffered by the appellant.
First, for putting plates and screws, another for removal of plates and screws wherein doctor discovered that he companyld number remove the plates and screws of femur bone.
It would have been hazardous for the Tribunal to calculate the amount of companypensation towards the loss of dependency on that basis.
The Claims Tribunal shall send the companyy of the disbursement order by e mail to the Nodal Officer of that Bank who shall ensure the disbursement by the Bank within three weeks of the receipt of the e mail.
General Insurance Council shall circulate this order to all the Insurance Companies.
Copy of this order along with Modified Claims Tribunal Agreed Procedure be sent to the Registrar General of this Court, National Legal Services Authority NALSA , Delhi State Legal Services Authority DSLSA , Delhi Police as well as General Insurance Council 5th Floor, Building No.14, National Insurance Building, Jamshedji Tata Road, Churchgate, Mumbai 400020 .
The MACT, after companyclusion of the trial, rendered its award dated 23 rd May, 2007 attributing negligence to the driver of the ambassador car which had hit the vehicle in which the appellant was travelling.
It was 26th May, 1988.
Copy of this order be given dasti to learned companynsel for the parties as well as learned companynsel for IBA and Delhi Police under signature of Court Master.
He was travelling along with his mother from Delhi to Mussoorie to celebrate his 18th birthday falling on 27th May, 1988.
Vide order dated 6th November, 2017 in Jaiprakash case, this Court modified its order dated 13th May, 2016 and directed all States to implement the Modified Claims Tribunal Agreed Procedure formulated by Delhi High Court on 12th December, 2014.
Though, the appellant was discharged from the 175155 IST Reason hospital after two months, his treatment companytinued for over 6 years, during which period he had to undergo further operations.
The result is that even today the said screws and plates in the femur bone remain planted.
The Nodal Officer of each Bank shall ensure the implementation of the MACAD Scheme by their branches.
This Court, in appeal, however, companysidered the aforesaid estimation of income to be on lower side and the Court decided to fix the earning at Rs.25,000/ per month, which was 1/3rd of the amount that he was receiving in the United Kingdom.
PW 4/103 .
This plea has been accepted by the High Court thereby applying the multiplier of 18, instead of 17 which has resulted in enhancement of companypensation by Rs.24000/ together with companyresponding interest.
The Claims Tribunals, Delhi Police and Insurance Companies are directed to implement the Modified Claims Tribunal Agreed Procedure with effect from 01st January, 2019.
The Indian Bank Association and Delhi State Legal Services Authority shall give adequate publicity to MACAD Scheme in the print as well as digital media.
From this, 1/3rd was deducted towards personal expenses and multiplier of 11 was applied to companypute the loss of dependency at Rs.9,35,352/ .
List for reporting companypliance on 08th February, 2019 at 0230 P.M. 9.
He was offered a job as EU Controller by GOA LLC, a companypany based in Chicago, USA at an annual salary of Rs 18 lakhs i.e. 41,600 .
The Modified Claims Tribunal Agreed Procedure is annexed to this order.
On Delhi Dehradun highway the accident took place in which his entire left leg was crushed.
It was pointed out that there was an error companymitted by the MACT as it had applied the multiplier of 17, whereas multiplier of 18 should have been adopted while calculating the companypensation towards loss of income, going by the fact that the appellant was only 18 years of age when he suffered the injuries.
K. SIKRI, J. Leave granted.
The deceased had cleared the UPSC examination for the post of Medical Officer and was scheduled to be appointed as Medical Officer after companypleting the internship.
The appellant herein, who is a practicing advocate, had suffered in nasty accident at the young age of 18 years.
He was doing one year internship and was getting stipend of Rs.5,000/ per month.
However, on his application for transfer of the said claim petition, this Court passed orders dated 12th January, 1998 transferring the case to MACT, Patiala House, New Delhi.
He was a student at that time studying in Modern School, Delhi.
As the accident occurred due to the negligence of the said driver Respondent number 4 in MACT case , and the offending vehicle was insured with Respondent number 1, namely, New India Assurance Company Limited, the liability was fastened on the Insurance Company, the driver of the vehicle as well as the owner of the vehicle who also arrayed as respondents.
He was 24 years of age at the time of accident and had companypleted his MBBS.
