IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 108 FAO-1229-2005 Date of decision :20.07.2026 SMT. PARWATI AND OTHERS ... APPELLANTS VERSUS ANIL KUMAR AND OTHERS ...RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PARMOD GOYAL Present: Mr. Shakti Bhardwaj, Advocate for the appellants. Mr. Rakesh Nagpal, Advocate for respondent No. 1. Mr. Vikrant, Advocate for respondent No. 2. Ms. Madhu Sharma, Advocate for respondent No. 3-Insurance Company. **** PARMOD GOYAL, J. (ORAL) 1. Present appeal has been preferred by the appellants-claimants being aggrieved by award dated 13.10.2004 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Karnal (hereinafter referred to as ‘Tribunal’), whereby appellant- claimants were awarded compensation of Rs.53,000/- on account of death of Laxmi Narain (hereinafter referred to as ‘deceased’) and were denied compensation for death of Daya Wati wife of Laxmi Narain holding that claimants are not dependent/legal heirs of Daya Wati, who had died in motor vehicular accident dated 25.11.2001 caused due to rash and negligent driving by respondent No.1 while driving Maruti Van bearing registration No. HR-04-9819. Appellants-claimants are seeking grant of compensation/enhancement of MANOJ KUMAR 2026.07.23 20:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document FAO-1229-2005 -2- compensation. 2. Since the finding of negligence on the part of respondent-driver is not being challenged by respondents either by way of appeal or by way of cross- objections, the detailed facts regarding manner of accident are not being noticed herein for the sake of brevity. 3. In the present case, the learned Tribunal had awarded the following compensation:- Income of deceased Rs.2,100/- per month Deduction 2/3rd Multiplier 5 Loss of dependency Rs.51,000/- (Rs.850/- x 12 x 5) Funeral expenses Rs.2,000/- Total compensation awarded to appellant- claimant No.1 Rs.53,000/- 4. In the accident dated 25.11.2001, Laxmi Narain and his wife Daya Wati, aged 47 years and 43 years respectively had died. The appellants-claimant, namely, the widowed paternal aunt (Bua) of Laxmi Narain (Claimant No. 1), Deepak, the adopted son of Laxmi Narain and Daya Wati (Claimant No. 2) and Anant Ram, 100% physically handicapped brother of Laxmi Narain (Claimant No. 3), sought compensation on account of the untimely deaths of Laxmi Narain and Daya Wati in the accident dated 25.11.2001, which was caused by respondent No. 1 due to his rash and negligent driving of vehicle bearing registration No. HR-04-9819. 5. In the present case, the learned Tribunal granted compensation of MANOJ KUMAR 2026.07.23 20:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document FAO-1229-2005 -3- Rs. 53,000/- to appellant-claimant No.1 only on account of the death of Laxmi Narain. However, no amount was awarded to any of the appellants on account of the death of Daya Wati on the ground that they were not the legal representatives of Daya Wati. 6. Learned counsel for the appellants-claimants has challenged the award on the ground that the learned Tribunal erred in not treating the claimants as legal representatives of deceased Daya Wati, especially when it stood proved on record that appellant-claimant No.2-Deepak was the adopted son of Laxmi Narain and Daya Wati. It was further contended that appellant-claimant No.2- Deepak was adopted by deceased as his biological father appellant-claimant No.3-Anant Ram was 100% physically disabled and was himself dependent upon Laxmi Narain and Daya Wati. It was further argued that the learned Tribunal erred in assessing the correct income of both the deceased, failed to grant future prospects, applied incorrect deduction and multiplier, and also failed to award compensation under conventional heads. 7. In the present case, the main dispute is whether the claimants are entitled to compensation in view of the finding recorded by the learned Tribunal that Daya Wati had no direct connection with the claimants and that they were merely relatives of her husband and that claimant No. 2 was not adopted by Laxmi Narain. Therefore, it is also to be seen whether appellant-claimant No. 2, Deepak, is to be considered as the adopted son of deceased Laxmi Narain and Daya Wati. 8. It is worth noticing that appellant-claimant No. 3, Anant Ram, appeared as PW-2 and stated that he was 100% disabled person and was fully dependent upon Laxmi Narain and deceased Daya Wati. He further stated that MANOJ KUMAR 2026.07.23 20:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document FAO-1229-2005 -4- appellant-claimant No.1-Parvati, his widow aunt and of Laxmi Narain, was also dependent upon Laxmi Narain and Daya Wati. He further deposed that appellant-claimant No.2-Deepak was given in adoption during his childhood. 9. However, the statement of PW-2 regarding adoption was not accepted by the learned Tribunal on the ground that details regarding adoption, i.e., date, month, and year of adoption, were not furnished. It was also noticed by the learned Tribunal that school records had not been produced to establish the name of appellant-claimant No.2-Deepak's father and, accordingly, it was held that the claimants had failed to prove the adoption of appellant-claimant No.2-Deepak by Laxmi Narain and Daya Wati. The learned Tribunal had also placed reliance upon ration card Ex. P-6, wherein the name of appellant- claimant No.2-Deepak was not mentioned as a member residing with Laxmi Narain. 10. PW-2, in his evidence, has clearly stated that he had been suffering from polio since childhood, was 100% disabled, and was receiving handicapped pension. He also asserted that claimant No. 2 was given in adoption at very young age. No rebuttal to assertions made by PW-2 was led by respondents. No one has come forward to claim estate of Laxmi Narain and Daya Wati being legal representatives. If the evidence of PW-2 is considered on the touchstone of standard of proof meant for motor accident claim cases i.e. preponderance of probabilities, his testimony regarding adoption deserves to be accepted, particularly in the absence of any rebuttal evidence led by the respondents. 11. Therefore, it is held that appellant-claimant No.2-Deepak was the adopted son of Laxmi Narain and Daya Wati only for the purposes of the present claim petition. It is clarified that in proceedings under the Motor Vehicles Act, MANOJ KUMAR 2026.07.23 20:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document FAO-1229-2005 -5- 1988 no declaration of status can be granted, but the relationship/status of the claimant is required to be determined only for the purpose of adjudication of entitlement to compensation. Accordingly, appellant-claimant No.2-Deepak is held to be the adopted son of Laxmi Narain and Daya Wati and is entitled to compensation on account of the death of Daya Wati. As far as compensation on account of the death of Laxmi Narain is concerned, all the claimants shall be entitled to compensation as per the apportionment determined by the learned Tribunal. However, in respect of the death of Daya Wati, appellant-claimant No.2-Deepak alone shall be entitled to the entire compensation amount. Compensation on account of the death of Laxmi Narain 12. The claimants have claimed that Laxmi Narain, aged 47 years, was earning Rs. 5,000/- per month as a cloth merchant. However, except for oral assertions, no cogent and reliable evidence was produced to prove the income and vocation of the deceased Laxmi Narain. The learned Tribunal treated Laxmi Narain as a casual worker and assessed his monthly income @ Rs. 2,100/- per month on the basis of the minimum wages payable to a casual/daily wager. After applying a deduction towards personal and living expenses, the learned Tribunal awarded a lump sum compensation of Rs. 53,000/-. In absence of any reliable evidence showing vocation and income of deceased, the learned Tribunal has rightly taken income of deceased, who was 47 years old by keeping minimum wages in view. Therefore, income of deceased Laxmi Narain is taken as Rs.2,100/- per month 13. Keeping in view the age of the deceased Laxmi Narain, who was 47 years old, the appropriate multiplier applicable would be 13. Further, in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in National Insurance MANOJ KUMAR 2026.07.23 20:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document FAO-1229-2005 -6- Company Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi and others, 2017 (16) SCC 680, an addition of 25% towards future prospects is required to be made while calculating the loss of dependency. Since the deceased was survived by three dependents, deduction towards personal and living expenses is required to be made to the extent of 1/3rd. 14. Appellant-claimant No.2 is also entitled to compensation of Rs.40,000/- under the head loss of parental consortium being adopted son. Appellants-claimants shall also be entitled to Rs.15,000/- towards funeral expenses and Rs.15,000/- 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 and Ors. Vs. National Insurance Co. Ltd., 2025 SCC Online SC 2919 in favour of appellants-claimants, appellants-claimants shall be free to seek said amount by moving appropriate application in this regard. 15. Accordingly, re-worked compensation is as under:- Income Rs.2,100/- per month (as assessed by the learned Tribunal on the basis of minimum wages) Rs.2,100/- per month Deduction 1/3rd (2100 – 700) Rs.1,400/- Future Prospects 25% (1400 + 350) Rs.1,750/- Multiplier 13 13 Total loss of dependency Rs.1,750 x 13 x 12 Rs.2,73,000/- Loss of estate Rs.15,000/- Funeral expenses Rs.15,000/- Loss of parental consortium to Claimant No.2 (adopted son) Rs.40,000/- Compensation awarded by Tribunal Rs.53,000/- MANOJ KUMAR 2026.07.23 20:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document FAO-1229-2005 -7- Compensation awarded in appeal Rs.3,43,000/- Enhancement of compensation Rs.3,43,000/- (as awarded in appeal) – Rs.53,000/- (as awarded by Tribunal) Rs.2,90,000/- Compensation on account of death of Daya Wati 16. The claimants have claimed that deceased Daya Wati was a school teacher in a private school and was earning Rs.2,000/- per month. However, except for oral assertions, no cogent and reliable evidence has been produced to prove the same. The employer of deceased Daya Wati was neither examined nor any proof regarding her educational qualification or employment were produced on record. However, since a casual worker would be earning similar amount, therefore, her income is assessed @ Rs.2,100/- per month, keeping in view the minimum wages payable in the year 2001. Since the deceased was survived by one dependent i.e. her adopted son, deduction towards personal and living expenses is required to be made to the extent of 1/2. She was stated to be 43 years of age at the time of the accident, therefore, multiplier of 14 and future prospects to the extent of 25% are required to be taken into consideration while calculating the loss of dependency of the claimants. 17. Appellant-claimant No.2 is also entitled to compensation of Rs. 40,000/- under the head loss of parental consortium. Appellant-claimant No.2 shall also be entitled to Rs. 15,000/- towards funeral expenses and Rs. 15,000/- 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 and Ors. Vs. National Insurance Co. Ltd., 2025 SCC Online SC 2919 in favour of appellant-claimant, appellant- claimant shall be free to seek said amount by moving appropriate application in MANOJ KUMAR 2026.07.23 20:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document FAO-1229-2005 -8- this regard. 18. Accordingly, the reworked compensation payable on account of death of Daya Wati is as under: Income of the deceased Rs.2,100/- per month (as assessed on the basis of minimum wages payable in the year 2001) Rs.2,100/- per month Deduction 1/2 (2100 – 1050) Rs.1,050/- Future Prospects 25% (1050 + 262) Rs.1,312/- Multiplier 14 14 Total loss of dependency Rs.1,312 x 14 x 12 Rs.2,20,416/- Loss of estate Rs.15,000/- Funeral expenses Rs.15,000/- Loss of parental consortium to Claimant No.2 (adopted son) Rs.40,000/- Compensation awarded in appeal Rs.2,90,416/- 19. Appellants-claimants shall be entitled to enhanced/awarded (in case of Daya Wati) compensation in appeal along with 7.5% interest from the date of filing of claim petition till realization (except under the conventional heads i.e. loss of consortium, funeral expenses, loss of estate). Under conventional heads interest shall be payable from August 2017 onwards till realization. Apportionment and liability to pay compensation shall be as per award. 20. Appeal is disposed of in above terms. 21. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand(s) disposed of accordingly. 20.07.2026 (PARMOD GOYAL) manoj JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes Whether reportable Yes/No MANOJ KUMAR 2026.07.23 20:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document