FAO-6102-2014 IN T SUMER DEVI A MRC LOGISTIC Whether only the Whether full judg CORAM: HON Present: Mr. S for c Mr. A for re Mr. S for re *** SUDEEPTI SHA 1. The 28.02.2018 passe Vehicles Act, 198 short, 'the Trib claimants/appella vehicular acciden granted compensa annum. 2014 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJ AT CHANDIGA FAO-6102 EVI AND ORS. Vs. ISTIC PVT. LTD AND ANR. Reserved o Pronounce Uploaded the operative part of the judgment i judgment is pronounced? HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUDE Mr. Sandeep Kumar Yadav, Advocate for claimants-appellants. Mr. Amit Kaith, Advocate for respondent No.1. Mr. Sanjeev Kodan, Advocate for respondent No.2-Insurance Comp *** I SHARMA J. The present appeal has been pre passed in the claim petition filed un ct, 1988 by the learned Motor Accide Tribunal') for enhancement of ppellants on account of death of Raje ccident occurred on 14.10.2013, wher pensation to the tune of Rs.4,65,500 PUNJAB & HARYANA DIGARH 6102-2014 (O&M) ......Appellan ......Responden rved on: 24.04.2026 ounced on: 13.05.2026 aded on : 14.05.2026 ent is pronounced? NO YES UDEEPTI SHARMA vocate Company. n preferred against the award date iled under Section 163-A of the Moto Accident Claims Tribunal, Narnaul (fo t of compensation granted to th f Rajender Singh, who died in a moto , whereby the claimants/appellants we 65,500/- alongwith interest @ 7.5% p pellants ondents d dated e Motor aul (for to the a motor nts were .5% per MOHD AYUB 2026.05.14 17:18 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. FAO-6102-2014 2. As s quantum of comp the facts of the ca SUBMISSIONS 3. Lear submissions:- 2014 (O&M) -2- As sole issue for determination in compensation awarded by the learned the case are not reproduced for the sak IONS OF THE LEARNED COUNSE Learned counsel for the claimants- i) That the amount assess the lower side. ii) That Section 163-A of substituted by Section 164 of M of 2019 w.e.f 01.04.2022) enhanced as per the substitute 164 of the Act. iii) That the present case rendered by this Court in “Akaljit Kaur and Others V wherein the claim under Sect Act, 1988 was converted to Se 1988 (Act 32 of 2019 w.e.f judgment of Hon’ble Supreme and others Vs. Punjab State 738] wherein it was held that S Act, 1988 (Act 32 of 2019 payment of compensation in Rs.5 lakhs and in the case of g on in the present appeal is confined learned Tribunal, a detailed narration the sake of brevity. UNSELS FOR THE PARTIES -appellants has made the followin assessed by the learned Tribunal is o A of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 is no 64 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (Act 3 .2022) and compensation should b stituted statutory provision i.e. Sectio t case is covered by the judgme t in FAO No.4301 of 2006, titled ers Vs. Parveen Kumar and Others r Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicl d to Section 164 of Motor Vehicles Ac w.e.f 01.04.2022) by relying upon th reme Court in the case of Ram Mur tate Electricity Board [2022(4) TA that Section 164 of the Motor Vehicl 2019 w.e.f 01.04.2022) provides fo ion in case of death in the amount se of grievous hurt of Rs.2.5 lakhs. fined to ation of llowing al is on is now (Act 32 uld be Section dgment titled as thers.” ehicles les Act, pon the Murti ) TAC ehicles ides for ount of MOHD AYUB 2026.05.14 17:18 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. FAO-6102-2014 4. Per Company contend claimants/appella FAO-3477-2014, Devi and ors.”, ch be dismissed. 5. I hav record of this case 6. A pe filed the claim pe Singh who was ag Motor Vehicles A 1988 (Act 32 of 2 per the substitute appellants herein enacted by the P payment of comp of grievous hurt o 7. Furth and Others Vs. P “11. othe that prov Secti 2014 (O&M) -3- Per contra, learned counsel for ontends that learned Tribunal has erre ppellants. He furthermore contends th 2014, titled as “Future Generali Indi , challenging the award. He, theref I have heard learned counsel for th is case. A perusal of the award indicates tha aim petition seeking compensation on was aged about 40 years at the time of cles Act, 1988 is now substituted by S 32 of 2019 w.e.f 01.04.2022), compen stituted statutory provision i.e. Sectio herein are entitled to be granted the the Parliament under Chapter 11 of compensation in case of death in the hurt of Rs.2.5 lakhs. Further, this Court in FAO No.4301 s. Parveen Kumar and Others” held 11. Hon’ble Supreme Cour others Vs. Punjab State Electricity that the appellants therein to be g provision enacted by the Parliame Section 164 provides for payment l for the respondent No.2-Insuranc as erred in granting compensation to th nds that he has filed separate appeal i. li India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Sum therefore, prays that the present appe for the parties and perused the who tes that in the present case the claiman ion on account of the death of Rajend ime of accident. Since Section 163-A d by Section 164 of Motor Vehicles Ac ompensation is liable to be enhanced ection 164 of the Act, therefore, th ted the benefit of beneficial provisio 11 of which Section 164 provides f in the amount of Rs.5 lakhs and in cas o.4301 of 2006, titled as “Akaljit Kau ” held as under:- Court in the case of Ram Murti an ricity Board [2022(4) TAC 738] he be granted the benefit of benefici liament under Chapter 11 of whic ent of compensation in the case surance n to the peal i.e. . Sumer t appeal e whole laimants ajender A of cles Act, nced as ore, the rovision ides for in case t Kaur ti and held eficial which ase of MOHD AYUB 2026.05.14 17:18 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. FAO-6102-2014 deat Rs.2 12. Othe Moto go appl these cure loss limb by e actu intel The conf 8. In vi award dated 07.04 163-A (pre 2018 Vehicles Act, 19 amount of compe 9. So fa Court in Dara Sin and R.Valli and Supreme Court 2014 (O&M) -4- death in the amount of Rs.5 lakhs Rs.2.5 lakhs. 12. This Court in FAO- Others Vs. Happy and Others, decid Motor Vehicle statute is a beneficial go into the technicalities of the application or petition is moved but these are only the irregularities and cured. It has been observed by the loss caused to the claimants or the r limb cannot be compensated. Still th by exercising its discretion empath actually be shown to be delivered by intelligence, prudence, care and ca The Court decision should be such confidence of public and litigants in In view of the above, the present ap 07.04.2025 is modified by convertin 2018 amendment) to Section 164 (po ct, 1988. As such the claimaints-app compensation i.e. Rs.34,500/- (5,00,00 So far as the interest part is concern a Singh @ Dhara Banjara Vs. Shya and Others VS. Tamil Nadu State T ourt Cases 107, the appellants-claim khs and in the case grievous hurt -195-2006 titled as Mamta an decided on 29.05.2024, held that sin ficial legislation, the Judge should n the provisions, under which th but should apply his judicial mind, s and not illegalities which cannot b the Hon’ble Supreme Court that th the relationship or to the victim of th till the Court should make every effo pathetically. Further, Justice shou d by application of judicial mind wi d caution and by showing empath uch that they strengthen the trust an ts in judicial system and judiciary.” ent appeal is allowed. Accordingly, th verting the claim petition under Sectio 64 (post 2018 amendment) of the Moto appellants held entitled to enhance ,00,000 − 4,65,500). oncerned, as held by Hon’ble Suprem Shyam Singh Varma 2019 ACJ 317 tate Transport Corporation (2022) claimants are granted the interest @ urt of a and t since ld not h the ind, as not be at the of the effort should d with pathy. st and .” gly, the Section Motor nhanced upreme J 3176 2022) 5 erest @ MOHD AYUB 2026.05.14 17:18 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. FAO-6102-2014 9% per annum on the date of its real 10. The compensation alo from today. The details to the Ins disburse the enha settled in award d 11. Acco 12. Pend 13.05.2025 Ayub/Sahil 2014 (O&M) -5- um on the enhanced amount from the its realization. The Insurance Company is directed t on along with interest with the Tribun . The appellants-claimants are direct the Insurance Company/Tribunal. Th e enhanced amount of compensation ward dated 28.02.2014 in the bank acc Accordingly, the present appeal is he Pending applications, if any, also sta (SU Whether speaking/non-speakin Whether reportable m the date of filing of claim petition t ected to deposit the enhanced amount Tribunal within a period of two month directed to furnish their bank accou al. The Tribunal is further directed sation along with interest as per rat nk accounts of the appellants-claimants al is hereby allowed. lso stand disposed of. (SUDEEPTI SHARMA) JUDGE peaking : Speaking : Yes ition till ount of months account ected to er ratio imants. MOHD AYUB 2026.05.14 17:18 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.