Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Navin Chawla, J.
National Insurance Company Ltd. - Appellant
Versus
Bala Gupta - Respondent
MAC.APP. 432 of 2023
Decided On : 18-09-2023
Compensation - Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal - MACT Case No.29/2012 - The court discussed the compensation assessment in favor of the claimants, the cause of death, and the relevance of medical testimony. The key legal provisions include the assessment of compensation in motor accident cases and the determination of the proximate cause of death.
Fact of the Case:
The appeal challenged the compensation assessment in MACT Case No.29/2012, focusing on the cause of death of the injured party and the relevance of medical testimony.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the injuries sustained in the accident were the proximate cause of the victim's death, despite the post-mortem report stating a natural cause of death.
Issues: The main issue was the assessment of compensation and the determination of the cause of death in the context of the accident.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the medical testimony and the findings of the Tribunal to conclude that the injuries sustained in the accident were the proximate cause of the victim's death.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and the appellant was exempted from depositing the statutory amount.
JUDGMENT
Navin Chawla, J. (Oral)
CM APPL. 47941/2023 (Exemption)
1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
CM APPL. 47940/2023
2. For the reasons stated in the application, the delay of 63 days in filing the appeal stands condoned.
3. The application stands disposed of.
MAC.APP. 432/2023 & CM APPL. 47939/2023
4. This appeal has been filed challenging the Award dated 25.03.2013 (hereinafter referred to the `Impugned Award') passed by the learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, North West District, Rohini, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the `Tribunal') in MACT Case No.29/2012, titled Smt. Bala Gupta and Ors. v. Satvinder Singh and Ors..
5. The limited challenge of the appellant to the Impugned Award is that the learned Tribunal has wrongly assessed the compensation in favour of the claimants, by treating the death of the injured, that is, Mr.Ishwar Chand Gupta, a result of the accident in question.
6. The learned counsel for the appellant drawing reference to the answers given by the Dr.S.K. Jain, Senior Consultant, CTVS, Maharaja Agarsen Hospital (PW-4), submits that the witness has clearly stated that as the post-mortem report stated that the deceased had died due to natural causes, he must have died due to a natural cause of death and not due to the injury suffered in the accident.
7. I am unable to find merit in the submissions made by learned counsel for the appellant.
8. In the present case, it had been proved on record that on 06.12.2011, the deceased was walking towards Sainik Vihar from Rishi Nagar. At about 5:00 p.m., when he reached at the gate of main street of Rishi Nagar, the offending vehicle, that is, one white coloured Maruti Wagon-R Car bearing no. DL9CQS8982, came from the side of gate no. 1 of Sainik Vihar and was being driven in a rash and negligent manner by the respondent no.1 herein at a high speed. The car hit the deceased causing injuries to him. The deceased was immediately removed to Bhagwan Mahavir Hospital, Pitampura where he was medically examined. The MLC No. 1793/11 reported that the deceased had suffered segmental fracture of right leg u/3, L/3 grade IIIc with vasculor injuries. The deceased was shifted to Maharaja Agrasen Hospital, Punjabi Bagh on the same day at about 7:30 pm for further treatment. The deceased died on 07.12.2011 at about 01:09 PM. The post-mortem was conducted by Dr.Bhim Singh, MD, Forensic Medicine, Junior Resident Specialist, Babu Jagjeevan Ram Memorial Hospital. In the post-mortem report the cause of death was opined as cardio-genic shock consequent upon blockage of left anterior descending coronary artery due to pre-existing coronary artery disease, a natural cause of death.
9. Though, the post-mortem states that the deceased had died due to natural causes, the testimony of PW-4 is relevant to determine if the same is in any manner also connected with the injuries sustained from accident in question. PW4 in his examination-in-chief had stated as under:
"I am a summoned witness and have brought the required record.
I treated the patient lshwar Chand Gupta, aged about 67 years, from 06.12.2011 to 07.12.2011 at Maharaja Agarsain Hospital, Punjabi Bagh, Delhi. The patient was admitted in the said hospital after the accident. The patient was admitted in the casualty of Maharaja Agarsain Hospital from Bhagwan Mahavir Hospital with a history of RTA and fracture of right leg and vascular injuries. I have seen the postmortem report of the deceased lshwar Chand Gupta of BJRM Hospital, which is already Ex.PW1/7. As per the said postmortem report, the patient died a natural death due to cardiogenic shock consequent upon blockage of left interior descending coronary artery due to preexisting coronary artery disease. It can happen in some old patients that some preexisting disease may aggravate due to injuries. In the present case, the patient was operated upon in the night of 06.12.2011, the operation continued till the early morning hours of 07.12.2011, the patient suffered heart attack at ab
The court affirmed that injuries from a motor vehicle accident can establish causation for subsequent death, emphasizing the importance of medical evidence linking the two.
The main legal point established is the court's reliance on medical evidence and expert testimony to determine the cause of death and calculate compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.
The court confirmed the nexus between accident-related injuries and subsequent death due to tetanus, holding the insurance company liable for compensation.
The court reinforced that in claims under the Motor Vehicles Act, the burden of proof lies with the insurer to demonstrate policy breaches.
The absence of a post-mortem report does not preclude the entitlement of claimants to compensation for injuries sustained in an untoward incident under the Railway Claims Tribunal Act.
The misclassification of a claim type by the tribunal warrants remand for proper evaluation.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
