Kin of DJB worker awarded Rs 25 lakh compensation
  • This Section
  • Latest
  • Web Wrap
Last Updated: Monday, March 26, 2012, 17:42
New Delhi: The kin of a Delhi Jal Board (DJB) employee, who died after being hit by a car in 2010, have been awarded a compensation of over Rs 25 lakh by a Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT).

The court directed National Insurance Company Ltd, with which the offending Maruti car was insured, to pay Rs 25,20,914 to the wife and five children of Ram Kishan Sharma, who was working as an assistant pump driver with Delhi Jal Board.

"I, accordingly, grant a compensation to the tune of Rs 25,20,914 to all the petitioners (family members of Sharma) with interest...," MACT Presiding Officer BS Chumbak said.

East Delhi resident Sharma died in October 2010 when he was going on a motorcycle to attend a complaint related to water problem and on reaching Geeta Colony, the Maruti car being driven by Kishan Kumar at a high speed, hit him.

Sharma, 42, who was earning over Rs 18,000 per month received grievous injuries in the accident and was taken to a hospital where he was declared brought dead.

The court, which had awarded a compensation of over Rs 28 lakh, however, deducted Rs 2.8 lakh from the amount saying the victim was under the influence of alcohol at the time of the accident and he too was responsible for the accident.

"In such circumstances, from the medical record of the doctor it can be safely held that at the time of accident the deceased was under the influence of alcohol and therefore, the he also contributed to the accident and accordingly, I held that the deceased should have been made liable to be compensated at 10 per cent of whole compensation which is to be granted in this case," the presiding officer said.

It was the contention of the insurance company that the victim was in an inebriated condition at the time of accident and his family was not liable for any compensation.

Sharma's family, however, denied it saying merely because the doctor got a smell of alcohol from the victim, does not proved that he was drunk.


First Published: Monday, March 26, 2012, 17:42

comments powered by Disqus