IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 225 FAO-1148-2002 (O&M) Date of decision:02.07.2026 SUSHILA AND OTHERS ...APPELLANTS VERSUS AJIT SINGH AND OTHERS ...RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PARMOD GOYAL Present: Mr. Sunil Bhadwaj, Advocate for appellants. *** PARMOD GOYAL, J. (ORAL) Present appeal has been preferred by the appellants-claimants who are wife and two sons of Dharambir (hereinafter referred to as the ‘deceased’), who died in motor vehicular accident which took place on 06.03.2000, on account of rash and negligent driving by respondent No.1 while driving truck bearing registration No. HR-46A-5056 , being aggrieved by the insufficient compensation of Rs.1,92,000/- awarded vide impugned award dated 03.10.2001, passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Rohtak (hereinafter referred to as ‘Tribunal’), being not in accordance with their entitlement. 2. Since in present appeal the only issue raised by appellants- claimants is as regards to quantum of compensation, the detailed facts as regards to manner of accident are not being noticed herein for the sake of brevity. 3. In present case, learned Tribunal had awarded the following compensation: SUNIL CHANDER 2026.07.06 18:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document FAO-1148-2002 (O&M) -2- Income Rs.2,400/- per month Deduction 1/3rd Multiplier 10 Total compensation awarded Rs.1,92,000/- 4. Appellants-claimants had claimed that deceased was in transport business and plying TATA four wheeler owned by his son. It is asserted that the deceased was earning about Rs.10,000-12,000/- per month by plying the TATA four wheeler. PW-6, Sushila Devi, wife of the deceased deposed that the deceased used to drive the vehicle of his son and earn about Rs.10,000-12,000/- per month. She also produced driving license Ex. P6 of the deceased. However, except for making oral assertions that deceased was working as a driver and earning about Rs.10,000-Rs.12,000/-per month no documentary evidence to show employment of deceased was produced. Since the driving license Ex.P-6 of the deceased has been placed on record the only conclusion from the said evidence which could be drawn is that deceased was driver by vocation. No cogent evidence to take pleaded income of deceased is available. No evidence was led to show that deceased was owner of any vehicle or TATA four -wheeler. In absence of any evidence supporting oral claim that deceased was earning about Rs.10,000-12,000/- per month, learned Tribunal has rightly taken minimum wages payable to driver in year 2000. Accordingly, income of deceased is taken as Rs.2,400/- per month as was held by learned Tribunal. 5. Learned Counsel for the appellants-claimants has asserted that no addition has been made towards future prospects which ought to be added to the extent of 25% in terms of judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in SUNIL CHANDER 2026.07.06 18:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document FAO-1148-2002 (O&M) -3- National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi and Ors., 2017 (16) SCC 680. Keeping in view age of the deceased as 48/49 years as per the post-mortem report the multiplier of ‘13’ would be applicable. Appropriate amount of compensation needs to be granted under the head funeral expenses, loss of estate and loss of consortium in accordance with law laid down by Hon’ble Supreme Court. 6. Learned Tribunal has taken the income of the deceased as Rs.2,400/- per month as per minimum wages payable to a skilled person taking deceased to be driver. Since deceased was survived by three legal representatives, 1/3rd of income is liable to be deducted towards personal expenses for determining loss of dependency. In the present case, deceased was aged about 48/49 years as per the post-mortem report (Ex.P4) and accordingly multiplier of ‘13’ would be applicable while determining loss of dependency. Similarly, keeping in view age of the deceased, 25% towards future prospects ought to be added to the income of the deceased in view of judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi & Ors. (supra). Further, appellant-claimant No.1 shall also be entitled to compensation for loss of spousal consortium @ Rs.15,000/-, appellants-claimants No.2 and 3 shall be entitled to compensation for loss of parental consortium @ Rs.15,000/- each. The appellants-claimants shall also be entitled to Rs.7,500/- towards funeral expenses and Rs.7,500/- towards loss of estate. It is however made clear that in case Hon’ble Supreme Court answer the reference regarding quantum of compensation under conventional head made in Hasina Yasmin & Ors. Vs. National Insurance Co. Ltd., 2025 SCC Online SC 2919 in favour of SUNIL CHANDER 2026.07.06 18:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document FAO-1148-2002 (O&M) -4- appellants, appellants shall be free to seek said amount by moving appropriate application in this regard. 7. Accordingly, reworked compensation is as under :- Income Rs. 2,400/- per month Rs 2,400/- per month Future prospects 25% (2400+600) Rs.3,00/- Deduction 1/3rd (3000-1000) Rs.2,000/- Multiplier 13 13 Total loss of dependency Rs.2,000x12x13 Rs.3,12,000/- Loss of estate Rs. 7,500/- Funeral expenses Rs. 7,500/- Loss of spousal consortium to claimant No.1 Rs.15,000/- Loss of parental consortium to claimant Nos. 2 & 3 Rs.15,000x2 Rs.30,000/- Total Compensation awarded in appeal Rs.3,72,000/- Total Compensation awarded by the Tribunal Rs.1,92,000/- Enhanced amount of compensation Rs.3,72,000/- (awarded in appeal) – Rs.1,92,000/- (awarded by the Tribunal) Rs.1,80,000/- 8. Appellants-claimants shall be entitled to enhanced compensation along with 7.5% interest from the date of filing of claim SUNIL CHANDER 2026.07.06 18:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document FAO-1148-2002 (O&M) -5- petition till realization of entire amount. Apportionment and liability to pay compensation shall be as per award. 9. Present appeal is allowed in above terms. 10. Pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of. (PARMOD GOYAL) JUDGE 02.07.2026 Sunil Chander Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No SUNIL CHANDER 2026.07.06 18:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document