238 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO-1027-2025 Date of Decision: July 10, 2026 Anil Devi and others … Appellants Versus Sonu and others …Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA Present:- Ms. Swa Bansal, Advocate for Mr. Vivek Suri, Advocate for the appellants. Mr. Nigam K. Bhardwaj and Mr. Phalit Batra, Advocates for respondent No.3-Insurance Company. DEEPAK GUPTA , J.(Oral) Appearance has been made on behalf of respondent No.3- Insurance Company. 2. It is claimants’ appeal seeking enhancement in the compensa on amount on account of death of Ashok Kumar. A claim pe on under Sec on 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 was filed by his widow, two children and parents, seeking compensa on from the driver, owner and insurer of the offending vehicle. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jhajjar (hereina3er referred as ‘the Tribunal’) has awarded total compensa on of `23,94,716/- and made all respondents to be jointly and severally liable to pay the said compensa on amount along with interest. 3. Seeking enhancement in the compensa on amount, two fold submissions have been made by learned counsel for the appellants. Her first submission is that the amount received by the appellants under the applicable Compassionate Financial Assistance or Appointment Rules, 2019 was not liable to be deducted. SARITA RANI 2026.07.10 17:18 I attest to the accuracy of this document/order FAO-1027-2025 - 2 - 2026:PHHC:094107 4. The aforesaid conten on has no merit. The Tribunal has rightly relied upon “Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Shashi Sharma & Ors., 2016 (4) R.C.R. (Civil) 569, so as to reject the said conten on. Once the amount has been received by the appellants under any compassionate assistance scheme, that is liable to be deducted from the total amount of compensa on. 5. The second submission made by learned counsel for the appellants is that the compensa on under the head of loss of consor um has been awarded only to widow – Anil Devi and not to the other claimants. It is also submiAed that all the four claimants were en tled to compensa on @ `48,000/- each under the said head and the appellants were also en tled to compensa on under the head of loss of estate and funeral expenses @ `18,000/- each. 6. Learned counsel for respondent No.3-Insurance Company has not refuted the aforesaid conten on, which is otherwise also supported by the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court rendered in “Na&onal Insurance Company Limited v. Pranay Sethi and others” 2017(4) RCR (Civil) 1009. Thus, the compensa on payable to the five claimants under the head of loss of filial/spousal/parental consor um works out to be `2,40,000/- (`48,000 x 5). They are also en tled to `18,000/- each under the head of loss of estate and funeral expenses, making the compensa on under these heads to be `2,76,000/-. However, an amount of `70,000/- has already been awarded by the Tribunal under the head of loss of consor um, loss of estate and loss of funeral expenses and therefore, the enhancement works out to be `2,06,000/-. 7. Consequently, the present appeal is accepted to the extent that the appellants will be en tled to the enhanced compensa on of SARITA RANI 2026.07.10 17:18 I attest to the accuracy of this document/order FAO-1027-2025 - 3 - 2026:PHHC:094107 `2,06,000/-, payable to them jointly and severally by the respondents along with interest @ 7.5% from the date of filing of the claim pe on ll its actual realiza on. July 10, 2026 (DEEPAK GUPTA) sarita JUDGE Whether reasoned/speaking: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No SARITA RANI 2026.07.10 17:18 I attest to the accuracy of this document/order