Smt.Saroop Etc. vs Manoj Kumar Etc.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH

114 FAO-35-2003 (O&M)
Date of decision :03.11.2026

SMT. SAROOP AND OTHERS . .. APPELLANTS
VERSUS
MANOJ KUMAR AND OTHERS ...RESPONDENTS
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PARMOD GOYAL
Present: Ms. Kamaldeep Kaur, Advocate
for the appellant.

Mr. Vishal Ahuja, Advocate

for the respondent-Insurance Company.


PARMOD GOYAL, J. (ORAL)

CM-200-CII-2003

For the reasons mentioned in the application for condonation of
delay of 49 days in refiling the present appeal, the same is allowed and the
delay in refiling the present appeal, is hereby condoned.
CM-201-CII-2003
For the reasons mentioned in the application for condonation of
delay of 27 days in filing the present appeal, the same is allowed and the delay
in filing the present appeal, is hereby condoned.
Main Case


1. Present appeal has been preferred by appellants-claimants being
mother, wife and (four) children of deceased Hari Chand (hereinafter referred to
as ‘ deceased ’) seeking enhancement in compensation awarded vide award dated
MANOJ KUMAR
2026.11.04 14:26
I attest to the accuracy and integrity
of this document

FAO-35-2003 (O&M) -2-

01.06.2002 passed by learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Faridabad
(hereinafter referred to as ‘ Tribunal ’), whereby appellants-claimants were
awarded total compensation of Rs.3,11,980/- on account of death of deceased
in motor vehicular accident dated 23.07.2000 allegedly caused due to rash and
negligent driving of respondent-driver while driving vehicle bearing registration

No.DL-9CC-0778 (hereinafter referred to as ‘ offending vehicle ’).

2. Since in the present appeal the only issue raised by the appellants-
claimants is with regard to the quantum of compensation and no appeal or cross-
objection has been preferred by any of the respondents to challenge findings of
learned Tribunal as regards to rash and negligent driving of offending vehicle
driven by respondent-driver, therefore, the detailed facts regarding the manner
of accident are not being noticed herein for the sake of brevity.

3. In present case learned Tribunal had awarded the following

compensation:-
Income Rs.2,933/-
rd
Deduction 1/3
Multiplier 13
Loss of dependency Rs.3,04,980/-
(Rs.1,955/- x 12 x 13)
Funeral expenses Rs.7,000/-
Total compensation
awarded
Rs.3,11,980/-


4. Learned counsel for the appellants/claimants has sought
enhancement of compensation on the following grounds:

● That the learned Tribunal has erred in not assessing the income
of the deceased as pleaded and proved by the claimants.

● That the learned Tribunal has failed to apply the correct
multiplier and deduction, as per age of deceased and number of
dependents.
MANOJ KUMAR
2026.11.04 14:26
I attest to the accuracy and integrity
of this document

FAO-35-2003 (O&M) -3-


● That no addition towards future prospects has been made while
calculating the loss of dependency. Future prospects ought to
have been added, as per age of deceased.

● That the learned Tribunal has also failed to award just and
appropriate compensation under the conventional heads, namely
funeral expenses, loss of estate, and loss of spousal, parental, and
filial consortium, in accordance with the law laid down by the
Hon'ble Supreme Court.


5. Learned counsel for the appellants-claimants has argued that
learned Tribunal has erred in determining loss of dependency without taking into
consideration all the relevant facts and evidence available on record and has
consequently awarded compensation on the lower side. Learned counsel for the
Insurance Company, however, has supported the impugned award by submitting
that just and reasonable compensation has been awarded by learned Tribunal and
.
no enhancement is warranted in the present appeal


6. It is the case of appellants-claimants that the deceased was aged 30
years at the time of accident and employed with M/s North-West Gear Limited
and also running a dairy, earning Rs. 5,000/- per month. In order to prove the
pleaded income and vocation of the deceased appellants-claimants have placed
reliance upon the evidence of claimant No.2 -Smt. Urmila as well as PW-2 Ved
Parkash, Time Office Supervisor, North-West Switchgear Limited. PW-2 had
duly placed on record the salary certificate of deceased as Ex. PW-3, wherein
the gross salary of deceased was shown to be Rs.3,794.35/- per month, which
included basic salary of Rs.1,466/-, dearness allowance of Rs. 1,466.95, house
rent allowance of Rs. 293.20, conveyance allowance of Rs. 293.20, canteen
allowance of Rs.175/-, washing allowance of Rs.25/- and compensatory
MANOJ KUMAR
2026.11.04 14:26
I attest to the accuracy and integrity
of this document

FAO-35-2003 (O&M) -4-

allowance of Rs.75/-. However, the learned Tribunal while assessing income of
deceased for determining loss of dependency, excluded the allowances being
received by deceased and took his monthly income as Rs.2,933/-, comprising

basic pay and dearness allowance.


7. Learned counsel for the appellants-claimants has argued that the
approach of learned Tribunal in excluding allowances cannot be accepted, as
allowances were part of the salary of deceased. It is further argued that learned
Tribunal had erred in not taking into consideration the income which deceased
was earning while working as a milk vendor.

8. On consideration, I find that the argument raised on behalf of
appellants-claimants is partially acceptable. As far as dairy income of deceased
is concerned, except for self-serving oral statement of claimant No. 2, no
evidence was placed on record to establish that deceased was either having any
cattle/buffaloes or was purchasing milk from others and thereafter selling the
same as a milk vendor. Therefore, in the absence of any other corroborative
evidence regarding the existence of dairy business and income derived
therefrom, the learned Tribunal had rightly rejected the claim of appellants-
claimants in this regard. Learned Tribunal has, therefore, rightly relied upon the
salary certificate Ex.P-1 to determine the income of deceased for the purpose of
assessing loss of dependency.

9. However, the exclusion of allowances by learned Tribunal cannot
be accepted, as only those allowances which are exclusively required for the
discharge of official duties and do not form part of the income available for the
benefit of the family can be excluded while determining loss of dependency.
Allowances such as conveyance allowance, house rent allowance, washing
MANOJ KUMAR
2026.11.04 14:26
I attest to the accuracy and integrity
of this document

FAO-35-2003 (O&M) -5-

allowance, canteen allowance and compensatory allowance being personal and
part of taxable salary being received by deceased and, therefore, could not have
been excluded merely on the ground that these were being paid as allowances.
Such allowances formed part of the gross earnings of deceased and were
required to be taken into consideration while determining loss of dependency.
Accordingly, the learned Tribunal ought to have taken the monthly income of
deceased as Rs.3,794.35/- as per salary certificate instead of restricting the same
to Rs.2,933/- by excluding the aforesaid allowances.

10. Accordingly, the monthly income of deceased is to be taken as
Rs.3,794.35/-( rounded off to Rs.3795/-). Since deceased was aged 30 years at
the time of accident, he would be entitled to addition of 40% towards future
prospects in view of judgment passed by Hon’ble Supreme Court in National
Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi and Ors. , 2017 (16) SCC 680. In
view of age of deceased to be 30 years, multiplier of ‘ 17 ’ would be applicable
as per judgment passed by Hon’ble Supreme Court in Smt. Sarla Verma & Ors.
Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation & Anr. , 2009(6) SCC 121. Similarly,
deduction towards personal expenses has to be made on the basis of number of
dependents which are six in present case i.e. mother, wife and four children.
th
Accordingly, deduction to the extent of 1/4 shall be applicable.

11. The loss of dependency, therefore, has to be determined by taking
monthly income of deceased to be Rs.3,795/-. by adding future prospects to
the extent of 40% , by applying multiplier of ‘ 17 ’ and by making deduction of
th
1/4 towards personal expenses.

12. Apart from compensation for loss of dependency, appellants-
claimants shall also be entitled to Rs . 15,000 /- towards funeral expenses and
MANOJ KUMAR
2026.11.04 14:26
I attest to the accuracy and integrity
of this document

FAO-35-2003 (O&M) -6-

Rs . 15,000 /- towards loss of estate . Appellant-claimant No.1 shall be entitled to
compensation of Rs . 40,000 /- towards loss of filial consortium . Appellants-
claimants No.2 shall be entitled to compensation of Rs . 40,000 /- each towards
loss of spousal consortium . Appellants-claimants No.3 to 6 shall also be
entitled to compensation of Rs . 40,000 /- each towards loss of parental
consortium. It is however made clear that in case Hon’ble Supreme Court
answer the reference regarding quantum of compensation under conventional
head made in Hasina Yasmin & Ors. Vs. National Insurance Co. Ltd. , 2025
SCC Online SC 2919 in favour of appellants-claimants, appellant-claimants
shall be free to seek said amount by moving appropriate application in this
regard.

13. Accordingly, reworked compensation is as under :-
Income Rs.3,795/-
Rs.3,795/-
per month
per month
Future Prospects 40%
(Rs.3,795/- + 1518)
Rs.5,313/-
th
Deduction 1/4
(Rs.5,313/-– 1328)
Rs.3,985/-
Multiplier 17 17
Total loss of dependency Rs.3,985/- x 12 x 17 Rs.8,12,940/-
Loss of Estate Rs. 15,000/-
Funeral Expenses Rs.15,000/-
Loss of filial consortium
to claimant No.1
Rs.40,000/-
Loss of spousal
consortium to claimant
No.2
Rs.40,000/-
Loss of parental
consortium to claimant
Nos.3 to 6
Rs.40,000/- x 4 Rs.1,60,000/-
Total Compensation
awarded in appeal
Rs.10,82,940/-
Total Compensation
awarded by the Tribunal
Rs.3,11,980/-
Enhanced amount of
compensation
Rs.10,82,940 /- (awarded
in appeal) – Rs.3,11,980/-
Rs.7,70,960/-
MANOJ KUMAR
2026.11.04 14:26
I attest to the accuracy and integrity
of this document

FAO-35-2003 (O&M) -7-

(awarded by the Tribunal)



14. Appellants/claimants shall be entitled to enhanced compensation
awarded in appeal along with 7.5% interest from the date of filing of claim
petition till realization (except under the conventional heads i.e. loss of
consortium, funeral expenses, loss of estate). Under conventional heads interest
shall be payable from August 2017 onwards till realization. Apportionment and
liability to pay compensation shall be as per award.

15. Appeal is accordingly allowed.

16. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand(s) disposed
of accordingly.


03.11.2026 (PARMOD GOYAL)

manoj JUDGE


Whether speaking/reasoned Yes
Whether reportable Yes/No



MANOJ KUMAR
2026.11.04 14:26
I attest to the accuracy and integrity
of this document