FAO-1866 IN THE HIG 224-A Raj Wati Ramesh Kum CORAM: H Present: - NIDHI GUP 1. enhancemen Accident Cla Award dated 26.09.2013 sole claiman years old at t 2. basis of pl deceased-Pri vehicular ac negligent dr (hereinafter 6-2015 (O&M) -1- HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HA Versus sh Kumar and another M: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDH Mr. RitikMohindra, Advocate fo Mr. Vishal Garg, Advocate for t Mr. Sachin Gupta, Advocate for respondent No. 2-Insurance I GUPTA, J. The appellant-claimant has file cement of the compensation of ₹8,02 ent Claims Tribunal, Bhiwani (for sho dated 22.09.2014, passed in MACT P 2013 filed under Section 166 of the laimant is the 52-year-old mother of old at the time of accident. Brief facts of the case are that of pleadings and evidence adduce Pritam, had died due to injuries, lar accident that took place on 08.0 ent driving of Tractor bearing reg nafter referred to as ‘the offending ve D HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO-1866-2015 (O&M) Date of Decision: 26.02.2026 .…Appellant ....Respondents NIDHI GUPTA cate for te for the appellants. rance Company. filed the present appeal seeking 8,02,600/- awarded by the Motor or short ‘the learned Tribunal’) vide ACT Petition No. 234 of 2013 dated the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The er of deceased-Pritam who was 24 re that the learned Tribunal on the dduced before it concluded that juries, suffered by him in a motor 08.09.2013 due to the rash and g registration No. HR-16-L-2104 ing vehicle’) owned and driven by king otor vide The the that otor and by RISHU KATARIA 2026.02.27 19:55 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. FAO-1866 respondent Insurance Co along with i petition till a pay the amou 3. compensatio that the dece Application Delhi; and w had assessed Learned cou Wages Noti 01.07.2013 worker is Notification taken on rec deceased de conventional towards fun consortium, on the highe accepted an deserves to b 6-2015 (O&M) -2- dent No.1-Ramesh Kumar; and ins nce Company. Learned Tribunal awa with interest @ 6% per annum from n till actual realization. Respondents N e amount of compensation jointly and Learned counsel for the appe nsation by submitting that the claima e deceased was a Graduate and had ation (DCA) from Rashtriya Saksh and was working as Electrical Wirem sessed the income of the deceased counsel for the claimant relies u s Notification issued by the State o 2013, to submit that as per the said No r is ₹5601.51 (rounded off to cation handed over in Court by learne on record. It is, therefore, submitted ed deserves to be enhanced. It is fur ntional heads the learned Tribunal s funeral expenses; and nothing ha rtium, loss of estate; and the rate of in higher side. It is accordingly, prayed t ed and the amount of compensatio es to be enhanced. nd insured by respondent No. 2- al awarded the above compensation from the date of filing the claim ents No. 1 and 2 were held liable to ly and severally. appellants seeks enhancement of claimant had duly proven on record had passed Diploma in Computer Saksharta Mission IT Education, Wiremen. Yet, the learned Tribunal eased as only ₹4800/- per month. elies upon the relevant Minimum tate of Haryana applicable w.e.f. aid Notification, income of a skilled to ₹5600/-). Copy of the said learned counsel for the appellant is mitted that monthly income of the is further submitted that under the unal has awarded only ₹25,000/- ing has been awarded by way of te of interest should also be granted rayed that the present appeal may be nsation awarded to the claimant tion laim le to t of cord uter tion, unal um .e.f. illed said nt is the the y of nted y be RISHU KATARIA 2026.02.27 19:55 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. FAO-1866 4. vehemently appellants already been had made an law the same No. 2 prays f 5. heard learne 6. the appellan Pritam was by way of pr of the decea 10 which sho in Compute Education, Electrical W record that th income of th per Minimu appellant ap assessed as 7. determined t 6-2015 (O&M) -3- Per Contra, learned couns ently opposes the submissions advanc and submits that in actual fact been awarded to the appellant-claim ade an addition of 50% towards futur e same should be 40%. Accordingly, l prays for dismissal of the present appe No other argument is raised on learned counsel for the parties and peru Perusal of the record shows th pellant-claimant that prior to the acc was a skilled Wireman and earning m y of private job of motor-winding and deceased, the claimant had produced ich show that the deceased was a Grad mputer Application (DCA) from Ras tion, Delhi and was also awarded th ical Wireman by CIDC New Delhi. that the deceased was a well qualified e of the deceased ought to have been t inimum Wages Notification produce applicable w.e.f. 01.07.2013. Thu ed as ₹5600/- per month. The record further reveals th ined to be more than 24 years at the counsel for respondent No. 2 advanced by learned counsel for the l fact compensation in excess has claimant, as the learned Tribunal s future prospects. However, as per ngly, learned counsel for respondent t appeal. sed on behalf of the parties. I have nd perused the case file in detail. ws that it was the pleaded case of the accident in question, deceased- ning more than ₹20,000/- per month and wiring. To prove the income duced documents Ex. P-5 to Ex. P- a Graduate and had passed Diploma m Rashtriya Saksharta Mission IT ded the Competency Certificate as Delhi. Thus, it was established on ualified and skilled person. As such, been taken as ₹5600/- per month, as oduced by learned counsel for the . Thus, income of the deceased is als that age of the deceased was at the time of accident, on the basis r the has unal per dent ave e of onth ome oma IT e as on uch, , as the is was asis RISHU KATARIA 2026.02.27 19:55 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. FAO-1866 of his Secon date of birth of 40% ough with judgme Company L whereas the prospects. Th 8. Tribunal ha Bachelor at deduction o Conventiona ₹25,000/- to re-assessed. 9. allowed; and assessed as Supreme Co Transport C Details Income Future prosp Deduction Multiplier Loss dependency 6-2015 (O&M) -4- Secondary School Examination Cer f birth has been mentioned as 12.10.19 ought to have been made towards f udgment of the Hon’ble Supreme C any Limited vs. Pranay Sethi and as the learned Tribunal has made an ad . The same is liable to be corrected. Keeping in view of the age o al has correctly applied multiplier lor at the time of accident, the learned tion of 50% towards personal exp ntional Heads, the learned Tribunal towards funeral expenses. The sa essed. In view of the above discuss and the amount of compensation ed as per the structured formula me Court in Pranay Sethi (supra) port Corporation, Law Finder Doc I Before the Tribunal ₹4800/- per month prospects 50% ₹4800+2400 = ₹7200/- 50%=₹3600 Annual dependency ₹7200-3600 x 12= ₹ 43,200/- 18 of dency ₹ 43,200/-x 18 = ₹7,77,600/- n Certificate, Ex. P-5 wherein his 2.10.1988. Accordingly, an addition ards future prospects in conformity eme Court in National Insurance i and others, (2017) 16 SCC 680; e an addition of 50% towards future rected. age of the deceased, the learned tiplier of 18. As deceased was a learned Tribunal has correctly made al expenses. However, under the ibunal has only awarded a sum of said amount is also liable to be discussion, the present appeal is ation payable to the claimant is re- enunciated by the Hon’ble and Sarla Verma vs. Delhi Doc Id # 188882 as follows:- Revised compensation ₹5600/- per month 40% ₹5600+2240=₹7840/- 50%= ₹3920/- Annual dependency ₹7840-3920 x 12= ₹ 47,040/- 18 ₹ 47,040/- x 18 = ₹8,46,720/- his ition mity nce ture rned as a ade the of o be RISHU KATARIA 2026.02.27 19:55 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. FAO-1866 Loss consortium Funeral expe Loss of Esta Total compensati Interest 10. 26.02.2026 rishu 6-2015 (O&M) -5- of rtium Nil al expenses ₹25,000/- f Estate Nil ensation ₹8,02,600/- 6% per annum Pending application(s), if any, s 2026 Whether speaking/reasoned Whether Reportable ₹40,000/- ₹15,000/- ₹15,000/- ₹9,16,720/- 6% any, shall also stand disposed of. ( NIDHI GUPTA ) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No RISHU KATARIA 2026.02.27 19:55 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.