FAO-5534-2022 (O&M) -1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 118 FAO-5534-2022 (O&M) Date of decision: 22.01.2026 Mithilesh Devi and others ...Appellant(s) Vs. Suresh Chander and others ...Respondent(s) CORAM: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Present:- Mr. S.K.Panwar, Advocate for the appellants. *** NIDHI GUPTA, J. The present appeal has been led by the claimants seeking enhancement of compensa#on of Rs.15,61,000/- awarded by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Faridabad (hereina.er referred to as “the learned Tribunal”) vide Award dated 28.09.2022 passed in MACP Case No. 151 dated 12.04.2019 led by the appellants under Sec#ons 166/140 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereina.er referred to as “the Act”). The 6 claimants are the 48-year-old widow; 27-year-old son; 25-year-old son; 22- year-old son; 20-year-old daughter; and 18-year-old son of the deceased Pramod Kumar, who was approximately 50 years old at the #me of accident. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the learned Tribunal on the basis of pleadings and evidence adduced before it concluded that the deceased-Pramod Kumar had died due to the injuries su=ered by him a motor vehicular accident that took place on 27.02.2019 due to the rash DIVYANSHI 2026.01.23 14:48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document FAO-5534-2022 (O&M) -2 - and negligent driving of a Trailer bearing registra#on No.RJ 32 GB 7141 (hereina.er referred to as “the o=ending vehicle”) being driven by respondent No.1; owned by respondent No.2; and insured by respondent No.3. The above said compensa#on was awarded alongwith interest @ 9% per annum to be paid by respondents No.1 to 3 jointly and severally. 3. Ld. counsel for the appellants seeks enhancement of compensa#on by submiDng that income of the deceased has been taken on the lower side as only Rs.8,827 p.m. It is submiFed that the appellants had proved on record that the deceased was a Security Guard. Therefore, income of the deceased ought to have been taken as Rs.14,000/-p.m. It is submiFed that even less amount has been awarded under the conven#onal heads. Deduc#on of 1/4th has been wrongly made. Nothing has been awarded towards transporta#on charges. Rate of interest should be 18% p.a. It is accordingly prayed that the present appeal be allowed; the Award be modied; and compensa#on be enhanced in above terms. 4. No other argument is raised on behalf of the appellants. I have heard learned counsel and perused the case le in great detail. I nd no merit in the submissions made on behalf of the appellants. 5. The pleaded case of the appellants is that the deceased was working as a Security Guard in Deep Heat Centre, Sector-6, Faridabad. However, appellants had failed to lead any evidence whatsoever in this regard. As such, learned Tribunal had correctly assessed income of the deceased as Rs.8,827/- p.m. on the basis of a Minimum Wage No#ca#on dated 15.02.2019 w.e.f. 01.01.2019 issued by the Labour Commissioner, DIVYANSHI 2026.01.23 14:48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document FAO-5534-2022 (O&M) -3 - Haryana. Age of the deceased was determined to be 50 years approximately on the basis of a Postmortem Report Ex.P11. Accordingly learned Tribunal had correctly made an addi#on of 25% towards future prospects; thereby calcula#ng annual income of the deceased to be Rs.1,32,396/- (Rs.8,827 + Rs.2,206 = Rs.11,033 x 12). Mul#plier of 13 has been correctly applied. Further, Tribunal has duly noted in para 18 of the Award that claimants No.2 to 6 are major children of the deceased; and claimants No.2 to 4, were also admiFed to being gainfully employed. In this manner, deduc#on of 1/4th was correctly made towards personal expenses. Thus, Tribunal awarded compensa#on in the following manner:- Sr. No. Heads Calcula#on 1. Monthly income Rs.8,827/- 2. 25% future prospects Rs.8,827 + Rs.2,206= Rs.11,033/- 3. Annual income Rs.11,033 x 12 = Rs.1,32,396/- 4. Loss of annual dependency a.er deduc#ng 1/4th towards personal and living expenses Rs.1,32,396- Rs.33,099=Rs.99,297/- 5. Compensa#on a.er applying mul#plier of 13 Rs.99,297 x 13 = Rs.12,90,861/- 6. For loss of estate, loss of consor#um and funeral expenses Rs.70,000/- 7. Loss of lial and parental consor#um payable to claimant no. 2 to 6 Rs.40,000 x 5 = Rs.2,00,000/- 8. Total Rs.15,60,861/- (rounded to Rs.15,61,000/- 6. From the above facts, it is clear that just and fair compensa#on has been awarded to the appellants. Nothing whatsoever DIVYANSHI 2026.01.23 14:48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document FAO-5534-2022 (O&M) -4 - has been shown to this Court that would merit enhancement of the said compensa#on. No doubt Chapter-12 of the Act is a benecial legisla#on yet, as cau#oned by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, the same cannot be allowed to be treated as a windfall or a source of prot. Hon’ble Supreme Court in “State of Haryana Vs. Jasbir Kaur” Law Finder Doc ID # 64043 and “Divisional Controller K.S.R.T.C. Vs. Mahadeva She(y”, (2003) 7 SCC 197, has held that the amount of compensa#on should be just and reasonable, it should neither be a bonanza nor a source of prot but at the same #me it should not be a piFance. In case of “KSRTC Vs. Susamma Thomas” 1994 Volume-II SCC 176, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that misplaced sympathy, generosity and benevolence cannot be the guiding factor for determining the compensa#on. 7. In view of the above, no ground is made out to interfere in the Award dated 28.09.2022. The present appeal is hereby dismissed. 8. Pending applica#on(s) if any also stand(s) disposed of. 22.01.2026 (NIDHI GUPTA) Divyanshi JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No DIVYANSHI 2026.01.23 14:48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document