[1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH i) FAO-3562-2019 Jyo and others ...Appellants Versus Dilbagh Singh and others ...Respondents ii) FAO-25-2019 Iffco Tokio General Insurance Company Ltd. ...Appellant Versus Jyo and others ...Respondents Reserved on: 03.07.2026 Pronounced on: 13.07.2026 Pronounced fully/operave part: Fully CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA Argued by: Ms. Parul, Advocate and Mr. Dheeraj Singla, Advocate for the appellant in FAO-3562-2019. Mr. Vishal Aggarwal, Advocate for the appellant in FAO-25-2019 and for respondent No.3 in FAO-3562-2019. **** DEEPAK GUPTA, J. These two appeals arise out of the common award dated 21.09.2018 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Barnala (hereinaer referred to as 'the Tribunal'), whereby compensaon of ₹8,41,000/- along with 7% interest came to be awarded on account of the death of Rakesh Kumar in a motor vehicular accident. YOGESH MEHTA 2026.07.13 16:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document [2] 2. FAO-3562-2019 has been preferred by the claimants seeking enhancement of compensaon, whereas FAO-25-2019 has been filed by the Insurance Company praying for its complete exoneraon or, in the alternave, for grant of recovery rights against the driver and owner of the offending vehicle. Since both the appeals arise from the same award and involve common quesons of fact and law, they are being disposed of by this common judgment. 3. The facts, shorn of any unnecessary details, are that on 05.04.2017 at about 7.20 A.M., deceased Rakesh Kumar was travelling from Dhanola to Barnala on his Acva scooter bearing registraon No.PB-19-K- 4770 with Dharampal as the pillion rider. When they reached near the sewerage canal behind the Electricity Grid within the revenue limits of village Dhanola, offending canter bearing registraon No.HR-56-9279, driven by respondent No.1 in a rash and negligent manner, suddenly applied brakes without giving any signal or indicator. The scooter being driven by the deceased collided with the rear side of the canter, resulng in grievous injuries to Rakesh Kumar. He was inially taken to Civil Hospital, Barnala and thereaFer shiFed to Midway Hospital, Ludhiana, where he succumbed to the injuries during treatment. FIR No.22 dated 06.04.2017 under Secons 279, 304-A, 337 and 338 IPC was consequently registered at Police Staon Dhanola on the statement of Dharampal. 4. The widow, minor son and mother of the deceased instuted a peon under Secon 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 seeking compensaon of ₹50,00,000/-. It was pleaded that the deceased was only 27 years of age and was employed as a photographer and movie mixing operator with Delhi Photo Goods and Digital Colour Lab, earning ₹16,500/- per month. It was further pleaded that approximately ₹53,000/- had been spent upon his treatment before his death. 5. The claim peon was contested by all the respondents. The YOGESH MEHTA 2026.07.13 16:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document [3] driver and owner denied negligence and pleaded that the accident had not occurred in the manner alleged by the claimants. It was, however, admiHed that the offending vehicle stood insured with respondent No.3 and, therefore, in the event of any liability being fastened, the same was payable by the insurer. 6. The Insurance Company filed a separate wriHen statement raising various statutory defences. It pleaded that the offending vehicle was allegedly not being plied in accordance with law and that it did not possess valid registraon, permit and fitness cerficate. It was further pleaded that respondent No.1 was not holding a valid and effecve driving licence on the date of accident and, therefore, the insurer was not liable to indemnify the insured. The amount of compensaon claimed was also stated to be excessive. 7. On the basis of the pleadings, the learned Tribunal framed the necessary issues and afforded adequate opportunity to both pares to adduce evidence. Upon appreciaon of the oral as well as documentary evidence, the Tribunal recorded a categorical finding that the accident had occurred solely due to the rash and negligent driving of the offending canter by respondent No.1. The Tribunal further held that the claimants had failed to establish either the avocaon of the deceased as a photographer or his alleged monthly income of ₹16,500/-. Accordingly, his monthly income was assessed noonally at ₹6,000/- and aFer deducng one-third towards personal expenses and applying the appropriate mulplier, compensaon of ₹8,41,000/- was awarded under various heads. The Tribunal also held that the offending vehicle possessed valid registraon, fitness cerficate, permit and insurance policy. No finding was recorded against the validity of the driving licence produced by respondent No.1. Consequently, the driver, owner and insurer were held jointly and severally liable to sasfy the award. YOGESH MEHTA 2026.07.13 16:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document [4] 8. Assailing the award insofar as it relates to quantum, learned counsel appearing for the claimants submits that although the claimants could not establish the precise income of the deceased by documentary evidence, yet the Tribunal commiHed a manifest error in assessing the monthly income at a mere ₹6,000/- without assigning any raonal basis. It is argued that, at the very least, the Tribunal ought to have adopted the nofied minimum wages applicable to an unskilled worker in the State of Punjab on the date of the accident, which were ₹7,568.52 per month. It is further contended that the Tribunal omiHed to award any addion towards future prospects despite the deceased being only 27 years of age. It is also argued that the documentary evidence regarding expenditure of about ₹53,000/- incurred during treatment was completely ignored. Lastly, it is submiHed that the compensaon awarded under the convenonal heads deserve to be brought in conformity with the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. 9.1 Per contra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Insurance Company, while supporng the quantum awarded by the Tribunal, submits in FAO-25-2019 that the insurer is entled to recovery rights as the driving licence produced by respondent No.1 was allegedly found to be fake during invesgaon. According to the learned counsel, though an applicaon seeking verificaon of the licence had been allowed by the Tribunal, the maHer came to be decided before the verificaon report could formally be received from the Licensing Authority. 9.2 Learned counsel for the Insurance Company, however, fairly does not dispute that the evidence on behalf of the insurer was closed before the Tribunal on 07.09.2018 aFer tendering documents Ex.R12 and Ex.R13 and that no official from the Licensing Authority or the invesgator, who allegedly verified the licence, was examined before the Tribunal. 10. I have heard learned counsel for the pares at considerable YOGESH MEHTA 2026.07.13 16:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document [5] length and have carefully examined the pleadings, the evidence led before the Tribunal, the impugned award and the original record. 11. At the outset, it deserves to be noced that the finding recorded by the Tribunal holding respondent No.1 guilty of rash and negligent driving has not been challenged by either the driver, owner or the Insurance Company. Even otherwise, the said finding is based upon cogent ocular as well as documentary evidence and does not suffer from any perversity or illegality. Since the findings have aHained finality, the controversy in the present appeals is confined only to (i) the justness of the compensaon awarded by the Tribunal and (ii) the entlement of the Insurance Company to seek exoneraon or recovery rights on account of the alleged invalidity of the driving licence. 12. The claimants' appeal regarding enhancement of compensaon shall be considered first. 13. Coming first to the determinaon of compensaon, learned counsel appearing for the claimants has fairly conceded that the claimants could not produce convincing documentary evidence to establish that the deceased was employed as a photographer and movie mixing operator or that he was earning ₹16,500/- per month as pleaded in the claim peon. The Tribunal was, therefore, jusfied in declining to accept the claimed income merely on the basis of oral asserons unsupported by any documentary material. 14. However, the approach adopted by the Tribunal in assessing the monthly income at ₹6,000/- cannot be sustained. The Tribunal has merely observed that an ordinary labourer could earn about ₹200/- per day and, on that assumpon, fixed the monthly income at ₹6,000/-. Such an approach is neither based upon any evidence nor upon any objecve criterion recognised by law. YOGESH MEHTA 2026.07.13 16:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document [6] 15. It is now fairly well seHled that where the actual income of the deceased cannot be proved by cogent evidence, the Courts are nevertheless under a statutory obligaon under Secon 168 of the Motor Vehicles Act to award "just compensaon". The expression "just compensaon" postulates determinaon of compensaon on raonal, objecve and legally acceptable parameters rather than on guesswork or personal noons of the Court. In such circumstances, the nofied minimum wages issued by the appropriate Government furnish the safest and most reliable benchmark for assessing noonal income. The statutory minimum wages represent the minimum remuneraon legally payable to a workman and, therefore, constute a reasonable yardsck for compung loss of dependency where no beHer evidence regarding income is forthcoming. 16. In the present case, learned counsel appearing for the Insurance Company has fairly not disputed that on the date of the accident i.e. 05.04.2017, the minimum wages nofied by the Government of Punjab for an unskilled worker were ₹7,568.52 per month. There is no evidence whatsoever to indicate that the deceased was unemployed or earning below the statutory minimum wages. Consequently, this Court finds no jusficaon for adopng the arbitrary figure of ₹6,000/- fixed by the Tribunal. The monthly income of the deceased is, therefore, assessed at ₹7,570/-, taking guidance from the statutory minimum wages prevailing at the relevant me. 17. The deceased was admiHedly 27 years of age on the date of the accident. The Constuon Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Naonal Insurance Company Limited v. Pranay Sethi and others, (2017) 16 SCC 680 has authoritavely held that even where the income is assessed noonally or on the basis of minimum wages, addion towards future prospects is mandatory depending upon the age of the deceased. Since the deceased was below 40 years of age and was self-employed/fixed wage YOGESH MEHTA 2026.07.13 16:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document [7] earner, an addion of 40% towards future prospects is liable to be made. 18. Likewise, the Tribunal has correctly deducted one-third of the income towards the personal and living expenses of the deceased. The deceased leF behind three dependents, who were actually dependent upon his earnings. Therefore, deducon of one-third is fully consistent with the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sarla Verma and others v. Delhi Transport Corporaon and another, (2009) 6 SCC 121. 19. Since the deceased was 27 years of age, the mulplier applicable to the age group of 26 to 30 years, as prescribed in Sarla Verma (supra), is 17, which has rightly been applied. 20. Another error commiHed by the Tribunal is that although documentary evidence regarding the treatment of the deceased prior to his death had been brought on record, no amount whatsoever has been awarded towards medical expenses. 21. The claimants produced various medical bills and treatment documents establishing that immediately aFer the accident, the deceased was first admiHed in Civil Hospital, Barnala and was thereaFer shiFed to Midway Hospital, Ludhiana, where he remained under treatment before ulmately succumbing to the injuries. The bills placed on record demonstrate that an amount of approximately ₹53,000/- had been incurred towards his treatment. These documents have not been rebuHed by the respondents by leading any contrary evidence. Nor has any suggeson been put during cross-examinaon that the bills are fabricated or unrelated to the treatment of the deceased. Consequently, the said amount deserves to be reimbursed in full. 22. Coming to the convenonal heads, the compensaon awarded by the Tribunal also requires suitable modificaon. In Pranay Sethi (supra), the Constuon Bench standardised compensaon payable under the YOGESH MEHTA 2026.07.13 16:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document [8] convenonal heads so as to bring uniformity and consistency in awards passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunals across the country. Subsequently, in Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nanu Ram alias Chuhru Ram and others, (2018) 18 SCC 130, the Hon'ble Supreme Court explained that consorum is not confined merely to spousal consorum but also includes parental consorum and filial consorum. The object behind awarding consorum is to compensate the surviving members of the family for the permanent deprivaon of love, affecon, companionship, care, guidance and emoonal support occasioned by the unmely death of a family member. 23. In the present case, compensaon towards consorum is payable separately to each of the eligible claimants. Accordingly, the widow is entled to spousal consorum, while the child is entled to parental consorum and the mother filial consorum. Consequently, all the three claimants are held entled to consorum at the rate of ₹48,000/- each, making a total of ₹1,44,000/-. The claimants are further entled to ₹18,000/- each towards loss of estate and funeral expenses, in conformity with the principles laid down in Pranay Sethi (supra). 24. Accordingly, the compensaon payable to the claimants is recalculated as under: Monthly Income ₹7577/- Annual Income ₹90,840/- AFer adding 40% ₹1,27,176 2/3 of the same ₹84,784/- Mulplier 17 Total loss of dependency ₹14,41,328/- Loss of Consorum (48,000 x 3) ₹1,44,000/- Loss of estate ₹18,000/- Funeral expenses ₹18,000/- Medical expenses ₹53,000/- YOGESH MEHTA 2026.07.13 16:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document [9] Total Compensaon ₹16,74,328/- 25. Since the Tribunal has already awarded ₹8,41,000/-, the claimants become entled to an enhancement of ₹8,33,328/-, which is rounded off to ₹8,33,500/-. 26. Consequently, FAO-3562-2019 filed by the claimants deserves to be partly allowed and the compensaon awarded by the Tribunal stands enhanced by ₹8,33,500/-, over and above the amount already awarded. 27. This Court shall now consider FAO-25-2019 preferred by the Insurance Company. 28. The sole submission advanced by learned counsel for the appellant-Insurance Company is that the Tribunal ought not to have decided the claim peon without awaing the verificaon report regarding the driving licence of respondent No.1. It is contended that the driving licence produced by the driver was subsequently found to be fake and, therefore, the Insurance Company deserves either complete exoneraon or, at least, recovery rights against the insured. 29. Having given thoughOul consideraon to the aforesaid submission, this Court finds no merit therein. It is not in dispute that respondent No.1 produced on record the driving licence Ex.R2, purportedly issued by the District Transport Officer, Zunheboto, Nagaland. The licence authorised him to drive heavy transport vehicles and was valid up to 06.07.2017, thus covering the date of accident i.e. 05.04.2017. The Tribunal also noced that the offending vehicle possessed a valid registraon cerficate, fitness cerficate, route permit as well as a valid insurance policy. Those findings have not been assailed on any independent ground and have consequently aHained finality. 30. The grievance of the Insurance Company is confined only to the YOGESH MEHTA 2026.07.13 16:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document [10] genuineness of the driving licence. The record indeed reveals that during the pendency of the proceedings, an applicaon was moved by the Insurance Company seeking verificaon of the driving licence from the Licensing Authority. The Tribunal allowed the said prayer. However, significantly, before any report was received from the Licensing Authority, learned counsel appearing for the Insurance Company made a categorical statement on 07.09.2018 closing the evidence on behalf of the insurer aFer tendering documents Ex.R12 and Ex.R13. Having voluntarily closed its evidence, the Insurance Company cannot now be permiHed to contend that the Tribunal ought to have postponed the adjudicaon of the claim peon. 31. Even otherwise, the material produced by the insurer falls far short of the legal standard required to establish breach of the insurance policy. Ex.R12 is merely an invesgaon report prepared by one Sh. Dilip Ch. Kalita, who was allegedly appointed as an invesgator by the Insurance Company. According to the report, he visited the office of the District Transport Officer, Zunheboto, Nagaland and was informed that the licence number menoned in Ex.R2 was not traceable in their record. Ex.R13 is stated to be a copy of certain informaon allegedly supplied by the Public Informaon Officer-cum-District Transport Officer, Zunheboto, Nagaland under the Right to Informaon Act. 32. However, neither the invesgator, namely Sh. Dilip Ch. Kalita, entered the witness box to prove the invesgaon allegedly conducted by him, nor was any official from the office of the District Transport Officer, Zunheboto examined to prove the authencity of the alleged verificaon report or the informaon contained in Ex.R13. Consequently, both these documents remained wholly unproved. 33. It is trite that a document does not become substanve evidence merely because it has been exhibited. A document can be read in evidence only aFer its execuon and contents are duly proved in YOGESH MEHTA 2026.07.13 16:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document [11] accordance with law by a competent witness. Mere marking of a document as an exhibit dispenses neither with its proof nor with the obligaon of the party relying upon it to establish its authencity. 34. The Insurance Company, therefore, failed to prove by legally admissible evidence that the driving licence produced by respondent No.1 was fake or forged. 35. Apart from the aforesaid, the legal posion governing the liability of the insurer also deserves noce. Under Secon 149(2) of the Motor Vehicles Act, the burden of establishing breach of policy condions squarely lies upon the insurer. The defence relang to absence of a valid driving licence is a statutory defence available to the insurer, but the same cannot be accepted merely on pleadings or suspicion. The insurer must affirmavely establish not only that the driving licence was fake, invalid or ineffecve, but also that there was a conscious and willful breach of the terms of the policy by the insured. 36. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Naonal Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Swaran Singh and others, (2004) 3 SCC 297, has categorically held that the mere absence, fake nature or invalidity of a driving licence does not by itself absolve the insurer from its statutory liability. The insurer is further required to establish that the insured was guilty of willful breach of the policy condions. Similar principles have consistently been reiterated in subsequent decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court. 37. In the present case, not only has the Insurance Company failed to establish that the licence was fake by leading admissible evidence, it has also led absolutely no evidence whatsoever to prove that the owner of the offending vehicle had consciously permiHed an unlicensed person to drive the vehicle or had commiHed any willful breach of the policy condions. 38. Consequently, even assuming for the sake of argument that YOGESH MEHTA 2026.07.13 16:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document [12] some doubt existed regarding the licence, the material available on record is wholly insufficient either to exonerate the insurer or to confer recovery rights against the insured. 39. The Tribunal, therefore, commiHed no error in fastening joint and several liability upon the driver, owner and insurer. 40. No other argument has been advanced on behalf of either side. 41. Consequently, FAO-3562-2019 filed by the claimants succeeds partly. The compensaon awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced by ₹8,33,500/-. The enhanced amount shall carry interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the claim peon ll realizaon and shall be payable jointly and severally by the driver, owner and insurer of the offending vehicle. The manner of apporonment and disbursement directed by the Tribunal shall remain unaltered. 42. FAO-25-2019, filed by the Insurance Company, being devoid of any merit, is accordingly dismissed. 43. Both the appeals stand disposed of in the above terms. Pending miscellaneous applicaon(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. A photocopy of this judgment be placed on the file of the connected case. 13.07.2026 (DEEPAK GUPTA) Yogesh JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No Whether reportable:- Yes/No Uploaded on: 13.07.2026 YOGESH MEHTA 2026.07.13 16:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document