FAO-545-2001 (O&M) -1- 232 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO-545-2001 (O&M) Date of Decision: 21.07.2026 NATIONAL INS. CO. LTD. .....APPELLANT VERSUS HARMANDEEP KAUR ETC. .....RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHVIR SINGH RATHOR Present: Mr. Deepak Suri, Advocate and Ms. Rahika Suri, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. Kanwal Goel, Advocate/Amicus Curiae for respondents No.1 to 3. Respondent No.4-Kewal Singh ex parte before the Tribunal. ***** YASHVIR SINGH RATHOR , J. (Oral) 1. This appeal has been instituted by Insurance Company against the Award dated 14.09.2000 decided by MACT, Faridkot (for short “Tribunal”) passed in MACT Case No.20 of 29.08.1996 in a petition under Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short ‘Act) vide which a sum of Rs.1,62,000/- has been awarded as compensation to claimants (respondents No.1 and 2 in the present appeal) on account of death of Gurmit Singh, along with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till realization in a motor vehicular accident which took place due to rash and negligent driving on the part of respondent No.2 (respondent No.4 in the present appeal) while driving the Truck bearing No.MP-26-A-1125 (for short ‘offending vehicle’), VISHAL VARDHAN 2026.07.24 16:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document FAO-545-2001 (O&M) -2- owned by respondent No.1 (respondent No.3 in the present appeal), which was insured with respondent No.3 (appellant in the present appeal) and Insurance Company has been held liable to pay the compensation to the claimants along with respondents No.1/owner and 2/driver of the offending vehicle, jointly and severally. 2. From the pleadings of parties, following issues were framed by the learned Tribunal:- “1. Whether deceased Gurmit Singh died on account of rash and negligent driving of Truck bearing registration No.MP-26-A-1125 by Kewal Singh, respondent No.2? OPA 2. Whether the claimants are legal heirs of deceased Gurmit Singh? OPA 3. Whether respondent No.2 Kewal Singh was not holding a valid driving licence at the time of accident? If so, its effect? OPR3 4. To what amount the claimants are entitled to and from whom? OPA 5. Relief.” 3. Thereafter, the parties led evidence in support of their case. 4. After hearing the parties and going through the material on the file, learned Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.1,62,000/- as compensation to the claimants along with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of filing of claim petition till realization, payable by respondents No.1 to 3 jointly and severally. 5. Feeling aggrieved, the appeal in hand has been preferred by the Insurance Company. The material on file has been perused and parties VISHAL VARDHAN 2026.07.24 16:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document FAO-545-2001 (O&M) -3- have been heard. 6. Learned counsel for the Insurance Company argued that the impugned award is based on conjectures and surmises. The pleadings of the parties and material on file have not been appreciated in the correct perspective while fastening liability upon the Insurance Company. Learned counsel next contended that the accident in question had taken place on 29.05.1996 and as per version of owner/insured, the offending vehicle was got insured for the period 21.05.1996 to 20.05.1997 but the policy was cancelled on 23.05.1996 due to dishonour of the cheque. Thereafter, fresh policy was taken on 30.05.1996 and on the date of accident, there was no effective policy. Learned counsel next contended that the driver did not possess a valid and effective driving licence. The award is also silent regarding the evidence led by the appellant/Insurance Company before the Tribunal in the form of copy of cover note Ex.R1, copy of policy Ex.R2, cheque return memo and other documents upto Ex.R10. Learned Tribunal has altogether ignored and has not referred to statements of the witnesses produced by the Insurance Company who proved the documents Ex.R1 to Ex.R3. As such, the Award passed by the Tribunal is wrong in law and same is liable to be set aside. Learned counsel next contended that excessive compensation has also been awarded to the claimants which is also liable to be reduced. Learned counsel prayed that appeal in hand be accepted and Insurance Company be exonerated of its liability to indemnify the insured. 7. On the other hand, learned counsel for respondents No.1 and VISHAL VARDHAN 2026.07.24 16:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document FAO-545-2001 (O&M) -4- 2 argued that the award in question is well reasoned and justified. Learned counsel further argued that the impugned award vide which compensation of Rs.1,62,000/- has been awarded and is liable to be modified and enhanced amount of compensation should be awarded. Learned counsel next contended that deceased was 19 years of age and income of the deceased has been assessed on lower side and that future prospects have also not been added to the monthly income of the deceased contrary to settled provisions of law. Learned counsel further contended that deceased was 19 years of age and multiplier of 16 has been applied whereas multiplier of 18 should have been applied. Learned counsel next contended that no compensation has been paid under conventional heads i.e. loss of consortium and loss of estate and compensation of Rs.2,000/- awarded for funeral expenses is on lower side and same be suitably enhanced. Learned counsel next contended that despite the fact that the claimants have not filed any appeal or cross- objections for enhancement of compensation, this Court has vide powers to enhance the compensation even in an appeal instituted by the Insurance Company against the award and he prayed that compensation be suitably enhanced. In support of his contentions, learned counsel has relied upon 2009(6) SCC 121 Sarla Verma and others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and Another, 2017 (16) SCC 680 National Insurance Co. Ltd Vs. Pranay Sethi and Other, 2018 (4) R.C.R. (Civil) 333, ‘Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nanu Ram alias Chuhru Ram & Others and (2021) 11 SCC 780, United India VISHAL VARDHAN 2026.07.24 16:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document FAO-545-2001 (O&M) -5- Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Satinder Kaur and judgment of a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Law Finder Doc ID #2884320, United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Taraqqi Lal (Since Deceased) and others. 8. At the very outset, it is pertinent to mention that the record of the present appeal and the Tribunal has got burnt in a fire incident in the High Court Registry and the present appeal has to be decided on the basis of the facts and evidence discussed by the Tribunal in the impugned award. 9. A perusal of para No.6 of the Award which contains necessary averments with regard to written statement filed by the Insurance Company are as under:- “6. Respondent No.3 in its separate written statement took preliminary objections that the claim petition is vague, incomplete and does not disclose any cause of action against this respondent: that respondent No.2 Kewal Singh alleged driver of truck No.MP-26-A-1125 was not holding a valid and effective driving licence at the time of accident: that there is no post mortem of the deceased: that the owner, driver and Insurance Company of the motorcycle are necessary parties and the claim petition is bad for their non- joinder and this respondent took all the pleas available to it u/s 147, 149, 151, 153, 157 and 170 to 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act. On merits, this respondent denied all allegations of the claim petition and pleaded that the deceased was not keeping good health and was not earning anything, rather he was a burden upon the family. It is further averred that no accident as alleged has taken place and the claimants put a concocted story just to garb the VISHAL VARDHAN 2026.07.24 16:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document FAO-545-2001 (O&M) -6- money from it.” 10. A perusal of the aforesaid pleadings shows that no plea has been taken by Insurance Company that the policy stood cancelled on account of dishonour of cheque on 23.05.1996 or that a fresh policy was issued after the accident on 30.05.1996. Even, no such plea had been raised at the time of arguments and no issue was framed as to whether the offending vehicle is insured with respondent No.3/Insurance Company or not and since, no such plea had been taken in the written statement and no evidence had been led to prove this fact, such a plea cannot be allowed to be taken for the first time in the appeal and Insurance Company has been rightly held liable to indemnify the insured. 11. So far as issue of driving licence is concerned, the Tribunal while giving the finding on issue No.3 has observed as under:- “14. The onus to prove this issue is upon respondent No.3. But no evidence has been produced by respondent No.3 in support of this issue. Rather, Jasbir Singh respondent No1, who appeared as RW2 has deposed that he is the owner of truck No.MP-26-A-1125 and his driver was Gurkewaljit Singh alias Kewal Singh. In United India Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Neena Tandon etc." 1992(2) S.L.J. 1335. it has been held by our own Hon'ble High Court that in case the driver of the vehicle was not holding a valid driving licence, nothing prevented the Insurance Company to call upon the owner and driver to produce the licence. No request in this case was made by the Insurance company to summon the driver and the owner of the vehicle. Once the Insurance company takes the plea that the driver was not duly licensed, onus lies upon it to prove the same. It is for VISHAL VARDHAN 2026.07.24 16:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document FAO-545-2001 (O&M) -7- the insurer to prove the violation of the terms of the contract to wriggle out of the liability. In this case, respondent No.3 has miserably failed to discharge the onus. As such this issue is decided against respondent No.3.” 12. In this manner, the Insurance Company also failed to establish that the driver did not possess a valid and effective driving licence to ply the offending vehicle. No effort was made by the Insurance Company to get the licence summoned through driver and owner. Tribunal has also thus rightly observed that once the Insurance Company takes a plea that the driver was not possessing a valid and effective driving licence, the onus was upon it to prove the same and in case, insurer fails to prove violation of terms and conditions of the Insurance Policy, it cannot wriggle out the liability and there is thus no reason to interfere with the finding returned by the Tribunal on issue No.3 and same is accordingly affirmed. 13. The next point to be decided is as to whether this Court while deciding an appeal instituted by the Insurance Company against the award of compensation can enhance the compensation without any appeal or cross-objections having been filed by the claimant. The answer to this question is certainly in the affirmative. A Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Taraqqi Lal’s case (supra), while placing reliance upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in (2021) 16 SCC 467, Surekha and Ors. Vs. Santosh and Ors., has held that the Appellate Court has jurisdiction to enhance compensation even when claimant has not filed cross-appeal or cross-objections as assessment of just compensation is the VISHAL VARDHAN 2026.07.24 16:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document FAO-545-2001 (O&M) -8- statutory duty of the court and procedural technicalities cannot deprive claimant of his legitimate entitlement. In Surekha Vs. Santosh’s case (supra), High Court of Judicature at Bombay while deciding the appeal filed by the Insurance Company had held that compensation amount payable to claimants ought to have been Rs.49,85,376/- but declined to grant enhancement merely on the ground that claimants/appellants had failed to file cross-appeal. However, Hon’ble Supreme Court held that in the matter of insurance claim compensation in reference to the motor accident cases, the courts should not take hypertechnical approach and should ensure that just compensation is awarded to the affected person or the claimants and awarded the enhanced compensation as assessed by Bombay High Court. 14. Next point is to be decided as to how much compensation should be awarded to the claimants. The term `just compensation’ has been elaborated by Hon’ble Supreme Court in 2009(1) RCR (Civil) 867 (SC), Syed Basheer Ahamed and Others Vs. Mohd. Jameel and Another, and it has been held that while assessing compensation in a motor accident claims case, the Tribunal should award compensation which appears to be just. The expression “which appears to be just” vests a wide discretion in the Tribunal in the matter of determination of compensation. Nevertheless, the wide amplitude of such power does not empower the Tribunal to determine the compensation arbitrarily, or to ignore settled principles relating to determination of compensation. It has been further held that although the Act is a beneficial legislation, it can VISHAL VARDHAN 2026.07.24 16:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document FAO-545-2001 (O&M) -9- neither be allowed to be used as a source of profit, nor as a windfall to the persons affected nor should it be punitive to the persons liable to pay compensation and that determination of compensation must be based on certain data establishing reasonable nexus between the loss incurred by the victim or dependents. It has been further held that misplaced sympathy, generosity and benevolence cannot be the guiding factors for determining the compensation. As such, compensation is required to be assessed by taking into consideration above-said parameters. 15. One of the claimants, namely, Harmandeep Kaur stepped into the witness box as PW1 and deposed that deceased was a student and he used to earn Rs.5,000/- per month from agriculture as her father-in- law owns 25-30 killas of land. To prove his income, claimants have examined PW2 Harpal Singh, who deposed that at the time of death, deceased was 19 years of age and he used to earn Rs.60,000/- per annum from agricultural land. However, there is no evidence on record to show that Gurmit Singh deceased owned any land or was earning from the said land. No revenue record was also led in evidence to establish that the father of the deceased owned any land which he used to manage and cultivate and in these circumstances, no reliance can be placed upon the self-serving statement of PW1 Harmandeep Kaur and PW2 Harpal Singh. However, the Tribunal by treating him to be non-earning member taken his notional income to be Rs.15,000/- per annum which in my opinion is on lower side. Hon’ble Supreme Court in (2022) 1 SCC 198, Chander alias Chander alias Chanda Ram and another Vs. Mukesh Kumar VISHAL VARDHAN 2026.07.24 16:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document FAO-545-2001 (O&M) -10- Yadav, decided vide judgment dated 01.10.2021 has held that merely because claimants are unable to produce documentary evidence to show the monthly income of the deceased is not a ground to discard the oral evidence and in such cases, the Court is required to ensure just compensation based on preponderance of probabilities. Minimum wage notification may serve as a yardstick but cannot be the sole basis for assessing the income. Moreover, it is also well settled that where the victim/deceased belongs to unorganized sector, strict proof of income is not mandatory and notional income can be reasonably assessed based on the social status and facts and circumstances of the case. As such, some amount of guess work has to be applied while assessing the monthly income. The accident had taken place on 29.05.1996. The claimant was a student and used to help his father in household chores and to look after his land and his income is accordingly assessed as Rs.2,000/- per month. 16. Deceased was 19 years of age as has also been held by the learned Tribunal and as such, 40% amount has to be added to the income of the deceased towards future prospects in view of law laid down in Pranay Sethi’s case (supra), which takes his income to Rs.2,800/- per month (Rs.2,000/- + Rs.800/-). 17. The petition in hand has been instituted by wife and mother of the deceased. Accordingly, it is held that deceased has left behind 2 dependents and 1/3 of the income thus has to be deducted towards personal and living expenses as per law laid down in Sarla Verma’s case (supra). After deducting a sum of Rs.933/- towards personal expenses, VISHAL VARDHAN 2026.07.24 16:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document FAO-545-2001 (O&M) -11- the monthly loss of dependency comes out to Rs.1,867/- (Rs.2,800/- - Rs.933/-) and the annual loss of dependency comes out to Rs.22,404/-. 18. As per guidelines laid down in Sarla Verma’s case (supra), multiplier of 18 has to be applied as deceased was 19 years of age and after applying the same, the compensation comes to Rs.4,03,272/- (Rs.22,404/- X 18). 19. As per law laid down in Pranay Sethi’s case (supra), a sum of Rs.70,000/- is payable towards conventional heads i.e. Rs.40,000/- towards loss of consortium, Rs.15,000/- towards loss of estate and Rs.15,000/- on account of funeral expenses. However, the judgment in Pranay Sethi’s case (supra) was passed in the year 2017 and taking into consideration the price index prevalent in the year 1996 when the accident took place, the claimant No.1/wife of the deceased is held entitled to a sum of Rs.20,000/- towards loss of consortium, Rs.7,500/- for funeral expenses and Rs.7,500/- for loss of estate. Likewise, claimants No.2 who is mother of deceased is also held entitled to a sum of Rs.20,000/- for loss of filial consortium. 20. Accordingly, the compensation to be awarded to the claimants/respondents No.1 and 2 is assessed as under:- S.No. Under Head Compensation assessed by this Court 1. Age of deceased 19 years 2. Monthly income of deceased Rs.2,000/- per month 3. Future prospects @ 40% Rs.800/- 4. Total income Rs.2,800/- per month VISHAL VARDHAN 2026.07.24 16:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document FAO-545-2001 (O&M) -12- 5. Number of dependents 2 6. Deduction towards personal expenses of the deceased (1/3rd) Rs.933/- 7. Monthly loss of dependency Rs.1,867/- 8. Annual loss of dependency Rs.22,404/- 9. Multiplier 18 10. Compensation on account of Loss of dependency Rs.4,03,272/- 11. Compensation under conventional heads to wife Rs.35,000/- 12. Loss of filial consortium to mother of the deceased Rs.20,000/- Total Compensation Rs.4,58,272/- (rounded off to Rs.4,58,000/-) Interest 9% per annum 21. Resultantly, with the aforesaid modification in the Award regarding enhancement of compensation appeal filed by the Insurance Company stands dismissed. Claimants/respondents No.1 and 2 are held entitled to a sum of Rs.4,58,000/- as compensation. The enhanced compensation thus comes out to Rs.2,96,000/- (Rs.4,58,000/- – Rs.1,62,000/-) over and above the compensation awarded by the Tribunal alongwith interest at the rat e of 9% per annum from the date of filing of claim petition i.e. 29.08.1996, till realization to be shared equally by the claimants, payable by respondents No.1 to 3 i.e. driver, insured and insurer, jointly and severally. 22. Registry is directed to email the authenticated copy of the VISHAL VARDHAN 2026.07.24 16:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document FAO-545-2001 (O&M) -13- award to the respondent Insurance Company in terms of directions issued by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Writ Petition (Civil) No.534 of 2020 titled Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Versus Union of India and others, decided on 16.03.2021 and Insurance Company shall comply with the directions as issued under Clause (F) of the said judgment. 23. Since the claimants/respondents No.1 and 2 are represented before this Court through Amicus Curiae, copy of judgment be sent to MACT, Faridkot as well as Secretary-cum-CJM, DLSA, Faridkot who shall get the copy of this judgment communicated to the claimants so that they can seek enhanced amount of compensation. 24. Pending misc. application (s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. (YASHVIR SINGH RATHOR) JUDGE 21.07.2026 Vishal Vardhan Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No VISHAL VARDHAN 2026.07.24 16:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document