IN TH 117 Sukhiya an Kala and o CORAM: Present:- NIDHI GU seeking enh learned Mo ‘the Tribu MACT Pet filed under (hereinafter deceased S of the accid FAO-1762-2008 (O & M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJA AT CHANDIGAR FAO No.1762 of Date of decision iya and others Versus and others AM:- HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NI None for the appellants. Mr. Rahul Noorie, Advocate f Mr. Abhimanyu Singh, Advoc Mr. Diwan S. Adlakha, Advoc Insurance Company. GUPTA J. (Oral) The present appeal has bee ing enhancement of compensation of ed Motor Accident Claims Tribunal Tribunal’), Jhajjar vide Award dat T Petition No.128 of 2004/2005 da under Sections 166 and 149 of the inafter referred to as ‘the Act’). The three claimants are the ased Suker Ali, who was stated to be e accident. 1 UNJAB AND HARYANA IGARH 762 of 2008 (O & M) cision :-26.02.2026 …..Appellants …..Respondents E NIDHI GUPTA cate for Advocate for respondent No.2. Advocate for respondent No.3- as been filed by the claimants on of ₹3,16,700/- awarded by the ibunal (hereinafter referred to as rd dated 19.09.2007 passed in 05 dated 19.08.2004/28.11.2005 f the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 e the widow and the parents of to be 22 years of age at the time VIJAY ASIJA 2026.02.27 19.07 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document there had b previous tw directed iss as learned make effor SHO of the are not res have been i appeared o issuance of on the basi claimants however, in the learned basis of the towards pe the age of Tribunal fu including c compensati FAO-1762-2008 (O & M) On the last date of hearing i.e had been no representation on beha ious two dates i.e. 08.07.2025 and 1 ted issuance of actual date of hearing arned counsel for 26.02.2026. Regist efforts through the Sarpanch of the of the concerned area to effect service As per office report, appellan ot residing at given address; and lear been informed. Today, when the matter has ared on behalf of the appellants. In nce of fresh notice to the appellants w Be that as it may, this Court ha The age of the deceased was e basis of Post Mortem Report (Ex.P ants that the deceased was an exp ever, in the absence of any documenta earned Tribunal assessed his monthly of the statements available on record. Since there were three depen rds personal and living expenses was age of 22 years, multiplier of ‘16’ nal further awarded a sum of ₹9,500/ ding consortium and loss of estate, ensation at ₹3,16,700/-. 2 ing i.e. 01.08.2025, noticing that behalf of the appellants on the and 16.07.2025, this Court had aring notice to the parties as well Registry was further directed to of the concerned village and the service upon the parties. pellants remain unserved as they d learned counsel for the parties er has been taken up, none has n the aforesaid premise, would be a futile exercise. ourt has perused the record. d was determined to be 22 years (Ex.P-24). It was the case of the an expert brick mason (mistri), mentary proof regarding income, onthly income at ₹2,400/- on the ecord. dependents, deduction of 1/3rd s was rightly made. Considering ‘16’ was applied. The learned 9,500/- under conventional heads state, thereby assessing the total VIJAY ASIJA 2026.02.27 19.07 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document has submit per the law was just, fa learned Tr deduction t absence of the period demonstrat settled prin enhanceme of. learned Tri February Vijay Asija Whether spea Whether Repo FAO-1762-2008 (O & M) Learned counsel appearing fo ubmitted that the accident had taken p he law prevailing at the relevant time, just, fair and reasonable. Having considered the matter ed Tribunal applied the appropriate ction towards personal expenses and nce of documentary proof on a reason eriod of accident. No material has nstrate that the assessment was eith d principles prevailing at the time. In the absence of any ground ncement, this Court finds no merit in th Accordingly, the appeal stands Pending application(s), if any Needless to observe that the lia ed Tribunal shall remain unaltered. uary 26, 2026 r speaking/reasoned Yes / No r Reportable Yes / No 3 ring for respondents No.2 and 3 taken place on 27.06.2004 and as t time, the compensation awarded matter, this Court finds that the opriate multiplier, made proper s and assessed the income in the reasonable basis keeping in view l has been placed on record to as either arbitrary or contrary to round warranting interference for rit in the present appeal. stands dismissed. if any, shall also stand disposed liability as determined by the ( NIDHI GUPTA ) JUDGE VIJAY ASIJA 2026.02.27 19.07 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document