Hunny And Ors vs Anil Kumar And Anr

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
(i) FAO No.459 of 2024 (O&M)
Iﬀco Tokio General Insurance Company Ltd. . . . . Appellant
vs.
Hunny and others . . . . Respondents

(ii) FAO No.644 of 2024
Hunny and others . . . . Appellants
vs.
Anil Kumar and another . . . . Respondents

(iii) CR No.1068 of 2025
Hunny and others . . . . Pe 77oners
vs.
Anil Kumar and another . . . . Respondents

Reserved on: November 05, 2026
Pronounced on: November 11, 2026
Pronounced fully/opera7ve part : Fully

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA
Argued By:- Mr. Sachin Ohri, Advocate
for the appellant in FAO No.459 of 2024;
for respondent No.2 in FAO No.644 of 2024;
and CR No.1068 of 2025.
Mr. J.P. Sharma, Advocate
for the appellants in FAO No.644 of 2024;
for the pe ((oners in CR No.1068 of 2025;
and for the respondents in FAO No.459 of 2024.
SARITA RANI
2026.11.11 14:57
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
Chandigarh

FAO No.459 of 2024 (O&M) 2026:PHHC:199067
FAO No.644 of 2024
CR No.1068 of 2025

DEEPAK GUPTA, J.
This order shall dispose of the aforesaid two appeals arising out
of the common award dated 02.11.2023 passed by learned Motor Accidents
Claims Tribunal, Bhiwani (hereina 2er referred to as 'the Tribunal'). While the
claimants have preferred an appeal seeking enhancement of compensa(on,
the insurance company has challenged the award primarily on the ground
that the vehicle insured with it was falsely implicated in an accident, which
was ini(ally reported as a hit-and-run case.
2. Brieﬂy, the claimants ins(tuted a pe((on under Sec(on 166 of
the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, seeking compensa(on on account of the death
of Sunil in a motor vehicular accident, which occurred on 28.08.2020.
According to the claimants, Sunil was travelling on motorcycle bearing
registra(on No. HR-16U-6684 along with his wife Hunny and sister-in-law
Jyo( @ Pinki, when near Gulab Chowk, village Kalinga, a Cruiser vehicle
bearing registra(on No. HR-64-4766, allegedly driven rashly and negligently
by Anil Kumar, struck against their motorcycle. Sunil sustained serious
injuries and ul(mately succumbed thereto on 07.09.2020.
3. The claim pe((on was contested by the driver-owner as well as
the insurance company, who denied involvement of the alleged oﬀending
vehicle and pleaded that the vehicle had been subsequently implicated in
collusion with the police.
4. Upon apprecia(on of the evidence, the Tribunal held that the
accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the Cruiser vehicle by
respondent Anil Kumar. Taking the monthly income of the deceased at
₹10,000, adding 40% towards future prospects, deduc(ng one-fourth
towards personal expenses and applying mul(plier of 16, the Tribunal
assessed loss of dependency at ₹20,16,000. A2er adding ₹40,000 towards
spousal consor(um and ₹15,000 each towards funeral expenses and loss of
estate, total compensa(on of ₹20,86,000 was awarded with interest at 7.5%
per annum from the date of ins(tu(on of the claim pe((on (ll realiza(on.
SARITA RANI
2026.11.11 14:57
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
Chandigarh
Page 2 of 11

FAO No.459 of 2024 (O&M) 2026:PHHC:199067
FAO No.644 of 2024
CR No.1068 of 2025

5.1 Learned counsel represen (ng the insurance company has
vehemently assailed the ﬁndings on negligence and involvement of the
insured vehicle. It is submiJed that the accident occurred on 28.08.2020,
whereas the ﬁrst informa(on report was registered on 03.09.2020, without
disclosing either the registra(on number of the oﬀending vehicle or the
iden(ty of its driver. Even the DDR recorded on 29.08.2020 on the
applica(on of PW-1 Hunny men(oned an unknown vehicle. It is pointed out
that the registra(on number of the insured Cruiser vehicle surfaced for the
ﬁrst (me in the supplementary statement of PW-1 recorded on 15.10.2020,
a2er approximately 48 days. Both PW-1 and PW-2 categorically admiJed in
cross-examina(on that they had neither seen the driver nor no(ced the
registra(on number of the vehicle involved in the accident.
5.2 Learned counsel further submits that the inves(ga(ng oﬃcer,
PW-3 SI Sita Ram, admiJed that the registra(on number was not men(oned
in the FIR and that the involvement of the vehicle was established during
inves(ga(on on the basis of the supplementary statement. It is argued that
neither the ini(al police record nor any contemporaneous medical document
iden(ﬁed the insured vehicle and that the Tribunal wrongly treated the
subsequent charge-sheet as suﬃcient proof of its involvement. Reliance has
been placed upon Saﬁq Ahmad v. ICICI Lombard General Insurance
Company Limited and others, par cularly the order dated 12.09.2023 ,
wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has taken cognizance of fraudulent
motor accident claims, including instances of subsequent implanta (on of
vehicles and drivers.
6.1 Per contra, learned counsel for the claimants has supported the
ﬁnding of the Tribunal on negligence. It is submi Jed that the occurrence of
the accident and the consequen(al death of Sunil stand established, and that
PW-1 and PW-2 were travelling on the motorcycle at the relevant (me. The
inves(ga(ng oﬃcer has proved the inves(ga(on culmina(ng in presenta(on
of the challan against Anil Kumar. It is further submiJed that the driver-
owner, who alone could have furnished a direct explana(on regarding the
SARITA RANI
2026.11.11 14:57
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
Chandigarh
Page 3 of 11

FAO No.459 of 2024 (O&M) 2026:PHHC:199067
FAO No.644 of 2024
CR No.1068 of 2025

alleged involvement of his vehicle, deliberately abstained from the witness
box.
6.2 As regards quantum, learned counsel submits that once the
Tribunal accepted that the deceased was a skilled worker engaged in
carpentry/furniture work, his income ought to have been assessed at ₹10,500
per month, being the minimum wages applicable to a skilled worker at the
relevant (me. It is further argued that the Tribunal erred in restric(ng
consor(um to the widow alone, whereas the three minor children and both
parents were independently en(tled to compensa(on under the said head.
7. Having heard learned counsel for the par(es and examined the
record, the following ques(ons arise for considera(on:
(i) Whether the evidence on record establishes, on the touchstone
of preponderance of probabili(es, that the accident occurred due to rash and
negligent driving of Cruiser vehicle bearing registra(on No. HR-64-4766 by
Anil Kumar?
(ii) Whether the compensa(on assessed by the Tribunal requires
modiﬁca(on?
Involvement of the oﬀending vehicle and negligence
8. It is well se Jled that proceedings under Sec(on 166 of the
Motor Vehicles Act are governed by the standard of preponderance of
probabili(es and not proof beyond reasonable doubt. In Bimla Devi and
others v. Himachal Road Transport Corpora on and others, (2009) 13 SCC
530 , the Hon'ble Supreme Court recognised that strict proof of the manner of
occurrence of a motor accident may not always be possible. Nevertheless,
the beneﬁcial character of the legisla (on does not dispense with the
requirement of establishing the involvement of the oﬀending vehicle and
negligence of its driver. The standard of proof is compara(vely less stringent,
but the ﬁnding must s(ll rest upon evidence possessing reasonable proba(ve
value.
SARITA RANI
2026.11.11 14:57
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
Chandigarh
Page 4 of 11

FAO No.459 of 2024 (O&M) 2026:PHHC:199067
FAO No.644 of 2024
CR No.1068 of 2025

9. In the present case, the insurance company's objec (on cannot
be brushed aside merely by observing that the registra(on number of the
oﬀending vehicle was not men(oned in the FIR. The objec(on is founded
upon the cumula(ve eﬀect of the ini(al police record, the subsequent
disclosure of the vehicle number and the admissions made by the two
alleged eyewitnesses.
10. PW-1 Hunny, widow of the deceased, admiJed in cross-
examina(on that she had moved an applica(on before the police on
29.08.2020 and that the DDR recorded thereon men(oned an unknown
vehicle. She further admiJed that she did not disclose the name of the driver
or the registra(on number of the oﬀending vehicle at the (me of lodging the
FIR. More importantly, she stated that she had not seen the driver or the
registra(on number of the vehicle which caused the accident. She also
admiJed that she did not know how vehicle No. HR-64-4766 and respondent
Anil Kumar came to be involved in the accident.
11. PW-2 Jyo( @ Pinki, the other alleged eyewitness, made
substan(ally similar admissions. She stated that she had not no(ced the
registra(on number of the vehicle, which caused the accident and had not
seen its driver. She further admiJed that neither she nor PW-1 disclosed the
name of the driver or registra(on number at the (me of lodging the FIR. Her
statement that she subsequently came to know about the vehicle does not,
by itself, establish the source or reliability of such informa(on.
12. The tes(mony of PW-3 SI Sita Ram, inves(ga(ng oﬃcer,
assumes signiﬁcance in the above background. He admiJed that the FIR did
not men(on the registra(on number of the oﬀending vehicle. He further
acknowledged that the deceased's wife had moved an applica(on on
29.08.2020, resul(ng in DDR No.16, and that the supplementary statement
disclosing the registra(on number was recorded on 15.10.2020 (Ex.P-9).
Although he stated that the vehicle was implicated during inves(ga(on and a
report under Sec(on 173 Cr.P.C. was submiJed against Anil Kumar, his
SARITA RANI
2026.11.11 14:57
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
Chandigarh
Page 5 of 11

FAO No.459 of 2024 (O&M) 2026:PHHC:199067
FAO No.644 of 2024
CR No.1068 of 2025

tes (mony does not disclose any independent material establishing how the
par(cular vehicle was traced or iden(ﬁed. No contemporaneous
iden(ﬁca(on of the vehicle by either eyewitness has been established.
13. The Tribunal chieﬂy rejected the insurer's objec(on by observing
that village women may not be familiar with the make or registra(on number
of a vehicle and that the deceased, being the motorcycle rider, was beJer
placed to no(ce the approaching vehicle. This reasoning does not adequately
address the material evidence. The FIR lodged on 03.09.2020, a2er the
deceased was discharged from hospital, admiJedly did not contain the
registra(on number. More importantly, the deceased's statement iden(fying
the par(cular vehicle, if any, has not been brought on record. The Tribunal's
inference regarding what the deceased might have observed cannot
subs(tute for evidence of what he actually disclosed.
14. Though, the subsequent supplementary statement of PW-1
dated 15.10.2020 does not become inadmissible merely because it was
recorded a2er some delay, but where the witness admits that she had not
seen the registra(on number and does not explain how she subsequently
acquired knowledge of it, the statement cannot automa(cally be treated as
reliable iden(ﬁca(on of the oﬀending vehicle. The lapse of approximately 48
days is to be considered not in isola(on, but in conjunc(on with the absence
of any sa(sfactory explana(on for the subsequent iden(ﬁca(on.
15. The Tribunal also placed considerable reliance upon the fact that
the police had presented a challan against Anil Kumar and that he did not
enter the witness box. Undoubtedly, the failure of a driver to tes(fy may
jus(fy drawing an adverse inference in an appropriate case. However, such
inference cannot relieve the claimants of the ini(al burden of establishing the
involvement of the par(cular vehicle. Similarly, a charge-sheet is a relevant
circumstance, but it is not conclusive proof of the allega(ons contained
therein. Where the material upon which the inves(ga(ng agency proceeded
SARITA RANI
2026.11.11 14:57
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
Chandigarh
Page 6 of 11

FAO No.459 of 2024 (O&M) 2026:PHHC:199067
FAO No.644 of 2024
CR No.1068 of 2025

is itself ques (oned, the Court must examine its eviden(ary worth rather than
trea(ng the conclusion of the inves(ga(ng oﬃcer as determina(ve.
16. Reference may appropriately be made to Saﬁq Ahmad v. ICICI
Lombard General Insurance Company Limited and others, SLP(C) No.1110 of
2017, wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has expressed serious concern
regarding fraudulent motor accident compensa (on claims, including cases
involving subsequent implanta(on of vehicles and drivers. The orders passed
in those proceedings emphasise the necessity of examining suspicious claims
with care. At the same (me, the said proceedings do not lay down any rule
that every case involving delayed iden(ﬁca(on of a vehicle must necessarily
be treated as fraudulent. The ques(on has to be determined upon the
evidence in each individual case.
17. In the present case, however, one material circumstance
dis(nguishes the maJer from a case, where the oﬀending vehicle is
introduced for the ﬁrst (me without any preceding descrip(on. Although the
registra(on number was absent from the FIR, the record, as no(ced by the
Tribunal, indicates that the vehicle was described as a Cruiser. Thus, the
subsequent inves(ga(on was not en(rely disconnected from the descrip(on
ini(ally furnished. The police therea2er recovered the vehicle, collected its
documents, recorded the statements of witnesses and presented the challan
against Anil Kumar. These circumstances cannot be ignored merely because
the registra(on number was disclosed subsequently.
18. Equally noteworthy is the fact that respondent Anil Kumar, who
was both driver and owner of the alleged oﬀending vehicle, did not enter the
witness box. He had speciﬁcally pleaded that his vehicle was not involved in
the accident and that the criminal proceedings were fabricated. However, he
did not substan(ate this defence by giving evidence regarding the
whereabouts of himself or his vehicle at the relevant (me. The insurance
company also did not produce any independent evidence indica(ng that the
vehicle was elsewhere or that the inves(ga(on was manipulated. Although
SARITA RANI
2026.11.11 14:57
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
Chandigarh
Page 7 of 11

FAO No.459 of 2024 (O&M) 2026:PHHC:199067
FAO No.644 of 2024
CR No.1068 of 2025

the failure of the driver to tes (fy cannot independently establish
involvement, it is a relevant circumstance when considered along with the
police inves(ga(on and other material.
19. The admissions of PW-1 and PW-2 regarding their inability to
no(ce the registra(on number undoubtedly weaken the eviden(ary value of
their subsequent iden(ﬁca(on. Nevertheless, both witnesses consistently
maintained that the accident occurred when a Cruiser vehicle coming from
the opposite direc(on struck the motorcycle. Their presence on the
motorcycle is not seriously disputed. The fact that neither witness was
medico-legally examined does not, by itself, discredit their presence,
par(cularly when both stated that they had sustained only minor injuries.
There is also no substan(ve evidence establishing that the deceased
sustained injuries in an altogether diﬀerent occurrence.
20. The allega(on of collusion with the police cannot be accepted
merely on suspicion arising from delay in iden(ﬁca(on. The insurance
company has not brought on record any aﬃrma(ve material establishing a
nexus between the claimants, the inves(ga(ng agency and the driver-owner
for fabrica(on of the claim. The fact that the inves(ga(on culminated in a
charge-sheet is not conclusive, but it remains a relevant corrobora(ve
circumstance. The absence of the driver-owner from the witness box also
leaves the claimants' version without any direct rebuJal from the person
alleged to have driven the oﬀending vehicle.
21. Thus, although the inves(ga(on leaves certain ques(ons
unanswered, the Court is required to assess the cumula(ve eﬀect of the
evidence on the standard applicable to proceedings under Sec(on 166 of the
Act. On such assessment, the descrip(on of the oﬀending vehicle in the FIR,
the consistent account of the occurrence given by the two witnesses, the
subsequent inves(ga(on culmina(ng in the charge-sheet, and the failure of
the driver-owner to rebut the allega(ons are suﬃcient to sustain the ﬁnding
of involvement on the touchstone of preponderance of probabili(es. The
SARITA RANI
2026.11.11 14:57
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
Chandigarh
Page 8 of 11

FAO No.459 of 2024 (O&M) 2026:PHHC:199067
FAO No.644 of 2024
CR No.1068 of 2025

discrepancies pointed out by the insurance company create suspicion, but in
the facts of the present case, do not jus (fy reversing the ﬁnding recorded by
the Tribunal.
22. Consequently, the ﬁnding of the Tribunal that the accident
occurred due to rash and negligent driving of Cruiser vehicle bearing
registra(on No. HR-64-4766 by Anil Kumar does not warrant interference.
The challenge raised by the insurance company on this count is accordingly
rejected.
Quantum of compensa on
23. Coming to the appeal preferred by the claimants, it is
undisputed that the deceased was approximately 34 years of age at the (me
of the accident. The Tribunal, a2er considering the evidence rela(ng to his
occupa(on, accepted that he could be treated as a skilled worker engaged in
furniture/carpentry work. However, despite recording such ﬁnding, his
monthly income was assessed at ₹10,000 by approxima(on.
24. Learned counsel for the claimants has submiJed that the
minimum wages of a skilled worker in Haryana at the relevant (me were
₹10,949.01/- per month. Once the Tribunal accepted the skilled nature of the
deceased's occupa(on, there was no jus(ﬁca(on for assessing his income
below the applicable minimum wages. Accordingly, accep(ng the minimum-
wage ﬁgure of ₹10,949.01/- per month as urged and not disputed by
reference to any contrary no(ﬁca(on, the monthly income of the deceased
deserves to be reassessed at ₹10,950/-.
25. The Tribunal has correctly allowed addi(on of 40% towards
future prospects, having regard to the age and employment status of the
deceased, in accordance with Na onal Insurance Company Limited v.
Pranay Sethi and another, (2017) 16 SCC 680 . Similarly, the deduc (on of
one-fourth towards personal and living expenses, considering the number of
dependants, and applica(on of mul(plier of 16 are in conformity with
Sarla
SARITA RANI
2026.11.11 14:57
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
Chandigarh
Page 9 of 11

FAO No.459 of 2024 (O&M) 2026:PHHC:199067
FAO No.644 of 2024
CR No.1068 of 2025

Verma and others v. Delhi Transport Corpora on and another, (2009) 6 SCC
121. These components do not call for any modiﬁca (on.
26. The claimants' conten(on regarding consor(um also deserves
acceptance. The Tribunal awarded ₹40,000 only to the widow, overlooking
the en(tlement of the three minor children and the parents of the deceased.
In Magma General Insurance Company Limited v. Nanu Ram alias Chuhru
Ram and others, (2018) 18 SCC 130 , the Hon'ble Supreme Court explained
that consor (um encompasses spousal, parental and ﬁlial consor(um. The
principle was reiterated in United India Insurance Company Limited v.
Sa nder Kaur alias Satwinder Kaur and others, (2021) 11 SCC 780 . Thus, the
widow is en (tled to spousal consor(um, the three minor children to parental
consor(um and both parents to ﬁlial consor(um. Each of the six claimants is
consequently en(tled to ₹40,000 under the said head, making the total
amount ₹2,40,000. No separate compensa(on towards loss of love and
aﬀec(on is permissible.
27. In view of the aforesaid discussion, the compensa(on is
reassessed as follows:
Par 7culars Amount

Monthly income of deceased ₹10,950

Future prospects @ 40% ₹4,380

Monthly income a 2er addi(on ₹15,330

Deduc (on towards personal expenses @ 1/4th ₹3832.5

Monthly dependency ₹11497.5

Annual dependency ₹1,37,970

Mul (plier 16

Loss of dependency ₹22,07,520

Loss of consor (um @ ₹40,000 each to six claimants ₹2,40,000

Funeral expenses ₹15,000

Loss of estate ₹15,000
Total compensa 7on ₹24,77,520
SARITA RANI
2026.11.11 14:57
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
Chandigarh
Page 10 of 11

FAO No.459 of 2024 (O&M) 2026:PHHC:199067
FAO No.644 of 2024
CR No.1068 of 2025

Compensa (on awarded by Tribunal ₹20,86,000
Enhanced compensa 7on ₹3,91,520
28. Accordingly, the appeal preferred by the insurance company is
dismissed, whereas the appeal preferred by the claimants is partly allowed.
The award dated 02.11.2023 is modiﬁed to the extent that the claimants shall
be en (tled to total compensa(on of ₹24,77,520/- instead of ₹20,86,000/-
awarded by the Tribunal. The enhanced amount of ₹3,91,520/- shall carry
interest at 7.5% per annum from the date of ins(tu(on of the claim pe((on
(ll realiza(on.
29. The liability to sa(sfy the award shall remain as determined by
the Tribunal. The enhanced compensa(on shall be appor(oned amongst the
claimants in accordance with their respec(ve en(tlements, including the
individual amounts awarded towards consor(um. The amount falling to the
share of the minor claimants shall be kept in ﬁxed deposits in accordance
with the direc(ons issued by the Tribunal. The amount, if any, already
deposited or disbursed shall be duly adjusted.
30. Both appeals stand disposed of in the aforesaid terms. All
pending miscellaneous applica(ons, if any, shall also stand disposed of.
CR-1068-2025
31. This revision was ﬁled by claimants praying for issuing
certain direc (ons to the Tribunal for the release of the Award amount.
However, Ld. Counsel for the pe((oners-claimants has not pressed to decide
it, as the main appeals have been disposed of.
32. In view of this statement of Ld. Counsel for the pe((oners-
claimants, the revision pe((on is disposed of as not pressed for.
November 11, 2026 (DEEPAK GUPTA)
Sarita
JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/No
Whether reportable? Yes/No
Uploaded on: November 11, 2026
SARITA RANI
2026.11.11 14:57
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
Chandigarh
Page 11 of 11