Vidya Devi And Another vs Ranjit Singh And Others

FAO-2191 of 2021 :1:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
FAO-2191 of 2021 (O&M)
RESERVED ON:03.11.2026
PRONOUNCED ON:13.11.2026
UPLOADED ON: 13.11.2026
VIDYA DEVI AND ANOTHER
...... Appellants
VERSUS
RANJIT SINGH AND OTHERS
...... Respondents
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPINDER SINGH NALWA
*
Present :- Mr. Lal Singh Sandhu, Advocate
for the appellants.
Mr. Lalit Garg, Advocate (through VC) and
Ms. Geetika, Advocate
for respondent No.3-Insurance Company.
*
Deepinder Singh Nalwa, J.
1.
The present appeal has been filed by the appellants-claimants
against the award dated 23.02.2021 passed by the Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal, Sirsa (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal'), seeking
enhancement of compensation.
2. Brief facts of the case are that on 16.08.2019, Ram Kumar,
along with Bhagirath son of Gobind Ram, resident of village Abubshahar
was going on his bicycle to bring green grass for animals from the fields.
Ram Kumar was going ahead of Bhagirath. When they reached near Anaj
Mandi, Abubshahar, the driver Ranjit Singh, while driving Mahendera XUV
bearing registration No.PB-08-DQ-2975 (hereinafter referred to as 'the
RIMPAL RANI
2026.11.13 13:05
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document

FAO-2191 of 2021 :2:
offending vehicle) rashly and negligently in a zig zag manner, came from the
side of Sangaria and struck the bicycle of Ram Kumar. As a result of the
accident, Ram Kumar fell on the road and sustained multiple grievous
injuries on his body. He was taken to General Hospital, Mandi Dabwali,
where he was declared brought dead. An FIR No.223 dated 16.08.2019 was
registered against the driver of the offending vehicle at Police Station Sadar
Dabwali under Sections 279, 427 and 304-A of the Indian Penal Code
(hereinafter referred to as 'IPC'). Thereafter, the widow and son of Ram
Kumar (since deceased) filed a claim petition bearing No.MACP-161 of
2019 under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 before the Tribunal
claiming compensation of an amount of Rs.20,00,000/- along with interest
@ 18% per annum, on account of death of Ram Kumar in a motor vehicular
accident on 16.08.2019.
3. Driver and owner of the offending vehicle duly filed their
written statement in the above said claim petition in which they have denied
the factum of having caused any such accident. It was a case of driver and
owner that the offending vehicle was not involved in the alleged accident
and a false case had been registered against the driver of the offending
vehicle. It was also their case that if any compensation has to be awarded
then only respondent No.3-Insurance company was liable to pay the same as
the insurer of the offending vehicle. Respondent No.3-Insurance company
filed a separate written statement. It was a case of the Insurance Company
that the driver of the offending vehicle did not have the valid and effective
driving licence at the time of accident and as such, the Insurance Company
RIMPAL RANI
2026.11.13 13:05
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document

FAO-2191 of 2021 :3:
is not liable to pay any compensation due to violation of terms and
conditions of the Insurance Policy. It was also the case of Insurance
Company that the compensation prayed for, by the claimants was on a
higher side.
4. The abovesaid claim petition was decided in favour of the
appellants-claimants by the Tribunal vide award dated 23.02.2021. As per
the above said award passed by the Tribunal, the claimants were held
entitled for a compensation of an amount of Rs.7,18,000/- along with
interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing the petition till its
realization. A perusal of the award passed by the Tribunal would further
show that widow-claimant No.1 was entitled for compensation to an extent
of 90% and son-claimant No.2 was entitled for remaining amount of
compensation. The driver, owner and Insurance Company were jointly and
severally liable to pay the compensation to the claimants.
5. Aggrieved against the award 23.02.2021 passed by the Tribunal,
the claimants have filed the present appeal.
6. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants-
claimants submits that a perusal of the award passed by the Tribunal would
show that no addition has been made to the actual income of the deceased
for the purpose of computing loss of future prospects. Learned counsel
submits that it is well settled law that in a case of death or permanent
disability, an addition has to be made to the actual income of the deceased
for computing loss of future prospects. Learned counsel submits that the
appellants-claimants are therefore, entitled to compensation under the head
RIMPAL RANI
2026.11.13 13:05
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document

FAO-2191 of 2021 :4:
of loss of future prospects. Learned counsel further submits that a perusal of
the award passed by the Tribunal also shows that only Rs.40,000/- has been
awarded under the head of loss of consortium. Learned counsel submits that
all the appellants-claimants are entitled for grant of compensation under the
head of loss of consortium. It is also the contention of the learned counsel
that the compensation awarded under the head of funeral expenses is on a
lower side.
7. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondents submits
that adequate compensation in accordance with law has been awarded to the
appellants-claimants and as such, there is no infirmity or illegality in the
award dated 23.02.2021 passed by the Tribunal and prays that the present
appeal filed by the appellants-claimants is liable to be dismissed.
8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through
the case file with their able assistance.
9. In regard to the contention raised by learned counsel appearing
on behalf of the appellants-claimants in regard to grant of compensation
under the head of loss of future prospects is concerned, it is well settled law
that in a case of death, an addition has to be made to the actual income of the
deceased for computing loss of future prospects, taking into consideration
the age of the deceased at the time of accident. Reliance is made to the
judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in National
Insurance Company Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi and others, 2017 (4) RCR
(Civil) 1009. Relevant extract of the judgment is reproduced hereunder:-
61. In view of the aforesaid analysis, we proceed to record our
conclusions:-
RIMPAL RANI
2026.11.13 13:05
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document

FAO-2191 of 2021 :5:
“(i) The two-Judge Bench in Santosh Devi should have been well
advised to refer the matter to a larger Bench as it was taking a
different view than what has been stated in Sarla Verma, a
judgment by a coordinate Bench. It is because a coordinate Bench
of the same strength cannot take a contrary view than what has
been held by another coordinate Bench.
(ii) As Rajesh has not taken note of the decision in Reshma
Kumari, which was delivered at earlier point of time, the decision
in Rajesh is not a binding precedent.
(iii) While determining the income, an addition of 50% of actual
salary to the income of the deceased towards future prospects,
where the deceased had a permanent job and was below the age of
40 years, should be made. The addition should be 30%, if the age
of the deceased was between 40 to 50 years. In case the deceased
was between the age of 50 to 60 years, the addition should be 15%.
Actual salary should be read as actual salary less tax.
(iv) In case the deceased was self-employed or on a fixed salary, an
addition of 40% of the established income should be the warrant
where the deceased was below the age of 40 years. An addition of
25% where the deceased was between the age of 40 to 50 years
and 10% where the deceased was between the age of 50 to 60
years should be regarded as the necessary method of computation.
The established income means the income minus the tax
component.”
10. Taking into consideration the facts of the case and the above
referred judgment, 10% has to be added to the actual income of the deceased
as assessed by the Tribunal under the head of loss of future prospects.
11. In regard to the contention raised by the learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the appellants-claimants that both the appellants-
claimants are entitled for grant of compensation under the head of loss of
consortium is concerned, it is well settled law that all the appellants-
RIMPAL RANI
2026.11.13 13:05
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document

FAO-2191 of 2021 :6:
claimants are entitled for grant of compensation under the head of loss of
consortium. Taking into consideration the date of accident, each of the
appellants-claimants are entitled for grant of compensation of Rs.40,000/-
under the head of loss of consortium. Reliance is made on the judgment
dated 18.09.2018 passed by Hon'ble the Supreme Court of India in Civil
Appeal No.9581 of 2018 (arising out of SLP (Civil) No.3192 of 2018) titled
as 'Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Nanu Ram @ Chuhru Ram
and others' . Relevant extract of the judgment is reproduced
below:-
“ 8.7 A Constitution Bench of this Court in Pranay Sethi
(supra) dealt with the various heads under which compensation is to be
awarded in a death case. One of these heads is Loss of Consortium.
In legal parlance, “consortium” is a compendious term which
encompasses ‘spousal consortium’, ‘parental consortium’ and ‘filial
consortium’.
The right to consortium would include the company,
care, help, comfort, guidance, solace and affection of the deceased, which
is a loss to his family. With respect to a spouse, it would include sexual
relations with the deceased spouse. Rajesh and Ors. V. Rajbir Singh and
Ors. (2013) 9 SCC 54.
Spousal consortium is generally defined as rights
pertaining to the relationship of a husband-wife which allows
compensation to the surviving spouse for loss of “company, society, co-
operation, affection, and aid of the other in every conjugal relation”
Parental consortium is granted to the child upon the
premature death of a parent, for loss of “parental aid, protection,
affection, society, discipline, guidance and training.”
Filial consortium is the right of the parents to
compensation in the case of an accidental death of a child. An accident
leading to the death of a child causes great shock and agony to the
parents and family of the deceased. The greatest agony for a parent is to
RIMPAL RANI
2026.11.13 13:05
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document

FAO-2191 of 2021 :7:
lose their child during their lifetime. Children are valued for their love,
affection, companionship and their role in the family unit.
Consortium is a special prism reflecting changing
norms about the status and worth of actual relationships. Modern
jurisdictions world-over have recognized that the value of a child’s
consortium far exceeds the economic value of the compensation awarded
in the case of the death of a child. Most jurisdictions therefore permit
parents to be awarded compensation under loss of consortium on the
death of a child. The amount awarded to the parents is a compensation
for loss of the love, affection, care and companionship of the deceased
child.
The Motor Vehicles Act is a beneficial legislation aimed
at providing relief to the victims or their families, in cases of genuine
claims. In case where a parent has lost their minor child, or unmarried
son or daughter, the parents are entitled to be awarded loss of consortium
under the head of Filial Consortium.
Parental Consortium is awarded to children who lose
their parents in motor vehicle accidents under the Act.”

12. In regard to the last contention raised by learned counsel
appearing on behalf of appellants-claimants that the amount awarded under
the head of funeral expenses is on a lower side is concerned, taking into
consideration the date of accident, this Court finds that adequate
compensation has been awarded under the head of funeral expenses.
13. In light of the above said facts, the appellants-claimants are
entitled for enhanced compensation reassessed as under:-
Assessment
Date of Accident 16.08.2019
Age of deceased 58 ½ years
Occupation Minimum wages fixed by Government
Claimants widow and son
1. Monthly Income Rs.9000/-per month
(unskilled worker)
2. Annual Income Rs.01,08,000/-
RIMPAL RANI
2026.11.13 13:05
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document

FAO-2191 of 2021 :8:
Rs.9,000/- X 12
3. Addition for future prospects @ 10% Rs.1,18,800/-
Rs.1,08,000/- (+) Rs.10,800/-
4. Deduction for personal and living
rd
expenses (1/3 )
Rs.1,18,800/- (-) Rs.39,600/-
Rs.79,200/-
5. Multiplier 9
6. Loss of Dependency Rs.7,12,800/-
Rs.79,200/- X 9
7. Loss of estate Rs.15,000/-
8. Funeral expenses Rs.15,000/-
9 Loss of consortium Rs.80,000/-
Rs.40,000/- X 2
10. Amount awarded by Tribunal Rs.7,18,000/-
11. Enhanced amount Rs.01,04,800/-
12. Final enhanced compensation Rs.8,22,800/-
14. In view of above, the award dated 23.02.2021 passed by the
Tribunal is modified to the extent that the appellants-claimants are held
entitled for grant of final enhanced compensation of an amount of
Rs.8,22,800/- along with interest @ 7.5% per annum as awarded by the
Tribunal.
15. The respondent No.3-Insurance company is directed to deposit
the final enhanced compensation as determined above with the Tribunal,
within a period of two months from the date of passing of this judgment.
16. The Tribunal is further directed to disburse the above said final
enhanced compensation as apportioned by the Tribunal to the appellants-
claimants. The appellants-claimants are directed to furnish their respective
bank account details to the Tribunal.
RIMPAL RANI
2026.11.13 13:05
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document

FAO-2191 of 2021 :9:
17. In view of above, the present appeal is allowed in above said
terms.
18. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand(s) disposed of
accordingly.
(DEEPINDER SINGH NALWA)
13.11.2026 JUDGE
Rimpal
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Whether Reportable : Yes/No
RIMPAL RANI
2026.11.13 13:05
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document