FAO No.3314 of
IN TH 107 Sunita Rani and o Gurdeep Singh CORAM : HON Present: Mr. for t Mr. for r *** AMARINDER S 1. The seeking enhance Accident Claims 11.02.2003, wher Ashwani Kumar, 2. Lear appellants are the on 30.11.1999 d No.DL-3CK-216 No.1. It is submi ₹10,000/- per m However, the lea deceased at ₹2, 314 of 2003 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJA AT CHANDIGAR FAO Dat i and others Versus ingh and others HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAR Mr. Vinod Kumar, Advocate for the appellants. Mr. Aseem Aggarwal, Advocate for respondent No.3 (through VC). ****
DER SINGH GREWAL, J. (ORAL) The present appeal has been file nhancement of the compensation a laims Tribunal, Ambala (hereinafter “ , whereby a sum of ₹3,21,400/- was g umar, husband of the appellant No.1. Learned counsel for the appella are the legal heirs of Ashwani, who di 999 due to the rash and negligent dr 2164 (hereinafter referred to as the submitted that the deceased was runn per month, which facts were duly p the learned Tribunal has gravely erred ₹2,850/- per month and awardin UNJAB AND HARYANA IGARH FAO No.3314 of 2003 (O&M) Date of Decision:20.01.2026 ...Appellants
... Respondents
MARINDER SINGH GREWAL VC).
RAL) en filed by the appellants–claimant tion awarded by the learned Moto after “the Tribunal”), vide award dated was granted on account of the death o No.1. ppellants-claimants submits that th who died in a motor vehicular acciden ent driving of car bearing registration as the offending vehicle) by responden s running a three-wheeler and earning duly proved by unrebutted evidence erred in assessing the income of th warding a meager compensation o imants Motor d dated eath of at the ccident stration ondent earning idence. of the tion of PANKAJ KUMAR 2026.01.30 10:21 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court Chandigarh FAO No.3314 of
₹3,21,400/- witho 1/3rd towards p awarding inadequ of the deceased w as 45 years and a applicable to the compensation. 3. Per award passed b infirmity, and tha the material ava that no ground is 4. I hav with their able a time of accident by PW-1 Sunita postmortem repo time of accident. of 13 and in ded deceased left be expenses ought down by the Hon Similarly, the ap deceased, who w monthly income 314 of 2003 (O&M) -2- without granting future prospects, by ards personal expenses despite there nadequate amounts under the conventi ased was 40 years whereas the learned and applied an incorrect multiplier of to the age group of the deceased, Per contra, learned counsel for the r sed by the learned Tribunal does not nd that the findings recorded therein a al available before the learned Tribu und is made out for interference in app I have heard learned counsel for the able assistance. This Court finds tha cident has rightly been taken as 45 ye Sunita/appellant No.1 during her cro report, Ex.P6, of the deceased stating cident. However, the learned Tribunal in deducting 1/3rd towards personal left behind five claimants, deductio ught to have been restricted to 1/4 e Hon’ble Supreme Court in Sarla Ve the appropriate multiplier would be who was aged 45 years at the time of a ncome of the deceased as ₹2850/ cts, by wrongly making a deduction o there being four dependents, and by nventional heads. Furthermore, the ag earned Tribunal wrongly took the sam lier of 13 instead of a higher multiplie , thus, prays for enhancement o or the respondent No.3 submits that th es not suffer from any irregularity o erein are well-reasoned on the basis o Tribunal. It is accordingly contended in appeal. or the parties and examined the record ds that the age of the deceased at th 45 years based on the statement given er cross-examination and also on th stating him to be 45 years of age at th ibunal erred in applying the multiplie rsonal expenses. Considering that th duction towards personal and living o 1/4th in terms of the principles laid la Verma v. DTC, (2009) 6 SCC 121 ld be 14 as suitable to the age of th e of accident. Accordingly, taking th 850/-, the annual income comes to tion of and by the age e same ltiplier ent of that the arity or asis of tended record, at the t given on the at the ltiplier hat the living les laid C 121. of the ing the mes to PANKAJ KUMAR 2026.01.30 10:21 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court Chandigarh FAO No.3314 of
₹34,200/-. Furth National Insura income works ou expenses and ap ₹4,48,896 /-. 5. In a loss of love and a each is payable every three year Pranay Sethi’s appellants works 6. The awarded by the le the date of filin respondent No.3 7. In v by the learned Tr extent. 8. Pend January 20, 202 Pankaj* 314 of 2003 (O&M) -3- Further, after adding 25% towards surance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi rks out to ₹42,750/-. After deducting and applying a multiplier of 14, the In addition thereto, each claimant e and affection/consortium, totaling to yable towards funeral expenses and l e years as per the law laid down by hi’s case (supra)). Thus, the tota works out to ₹7,27,196 /-. The enhanced compensation, i.e. ov y the learned Tribunal, shall also carry f filing of the claim petition till t No.3 to the appellants-claimants in eq In view of the aforesaid facts and c ned Tribunal is modified and the prese Pending application(s), if any, shall (AMA , 2026 Whether speaking/reaso Whether reportable owards future prospects, in view o thi, (2017) 16 SCC 680, the annua cting 1/4th therefrom towards persona , the annual dependency comes to imant is entitled to ₹48,400/- toward ling to ₹2,42,000/- as well as ₹18,150/ and loss of estate (escalation @10% wn by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in e total compensation payable to th i.e. over and above the compensation carry interest @7.5% per annum from till its realization, payable by th ts in equal ratios. s and circumstances, the award passed e present appeal is allowed to the abov , shall also stand disposed of. AMARINDER SINGH GREWAL JUDGE g/reasoned : Yes/No : Yes/No iew of annual rsonal mes to owards 0/- @10% ourt in to the nsation from by the passed e above AL) PANKAJ KUMAR 2026.01.30 10:21 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court Chandigarh