Asha And Another vs Malkit Singh Alias Meeta And Others

FAO-335-2024 (O&M) -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
133 FAO-335-2024 (O&M)
Date of decision: 02.09.2026
Asha and another
....Appellants
Vs.
Malkit Singh @ Meeta and others
....Respondents
CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSH BUNGER
Present: Mr. Sandeep Saini, Advocate
for the appellants.
Mr. Munish Goel, Advocate
for respondent No.3 (Insurance Company).
*
HARSH BUNGER J.
The present  appeal has been filed by claimants, seeking
enhancement of compensation of Rs.3,70,000/- awarded by the learned
Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ambala (hereinafter referred to as the
“learned Tribunal”) vide award dated 19.07.2023, on account of death of
their minor son Krishna, who died due to injuries sustained by him in a road
accident occurred on 19.04.2019.
2. Briefly, the present appellants/claimants filed petition under
Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short the ‘1988 Act’)
seeking compensation on account of death of their minor son Krishna in a
ANKIT
2026.09.03 17:57
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
High Court, Chandigarh

FAO-335-2024 (O&M) -2-
roadside accident, on the plea that on 19.04.2019, at about 04.30 p.m.,
appellant No.2 – Ram Jivan (father of Krishna) took Krishna to a shop at
Purani Ghas mandi Road for getting him candies. After giving him candies,
Ram Jivan asked the minor to go home. Appellant No.1 – Asha (mother of
Krishna) was standing on one side of the road and the minor child (Krishna)
crossed the road and reached the other side. When the child was standing on
the other side of the road, a canter bearing registration No. HR-38J-3147
(offending vehicle), driven by Malkit Singh @ Meeta in a rash and negligent
manner at high speed suddenly came from highway side and turned the
canter towards the Govind Vihar Colony. The canter hit the child as a result
of which, the child sustained grievous injuries. He was taken to Civil
Hospital, Ambala City, where he was declared dead. A case FIR No.160
dated 19.04.2019, was lodged under Section 279, 304-A, IPC at Police
Station, Ambala City.
2.1 The deceased child (Krishna) was three years of age at the time
of his death. It was stated that Krishna was the only child of the claimants
and after his birth, the claimants had undergone sterilization operation and
there is no chance to have a child in the future. Gian Chand (respondent
No.2) is stated to be the owner of the offending vehicle, which was insured
with the United India Insurance Company Limited (respondent No.3).
3. Upon issuance of notice by the learned Tribunal, the driver and
owner of the offending vehicle filed their joint written statement taking
various preliminary objections. They denied that the accident took place
ANKIT
2026.09.03 17:57
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
High Court, Chandigarh

FAO-335-2024 (O&M) -3-
with the offending vehicle, which was driven by Malkit Singh @ Meeta and
they further pleaded false implication and prayed for dismissal of the suit.
3.1 On the other hand, Insurance Company filed its separate written
statement taking various preliminary objections. They also denied that any
accident took place due to rash and negligent driving of the offending
vehicle. It was further stated that Malkit Singh @ Meeta was not having a
valid and effective driving license, registration certificate as well as permit at
the time of accident, therefore, the Insurance Company is not liable to pay
the compensation.
4. From the pleading of the parties, following issues were framed
by the learned Tribunal:-
“1. Whether the accident in question took place due to rash and
negligent driving of canter bearing registration No.
HR-38J-3147 by respondent No.1 resulting into death of
Krishna, as alleged?OPP
2. If Issue no.1 is proved, to what amount of compensation
and from whom the claimant is entitled?OPP
3. Whether the present petition is not maintainable?OPR
4. Relief.”
5 Thereafter, the claimants led their evidence on the aforesaid
issues.
6. It is worth noticing here that no oral evidence was produced by
the respondents in the claim petition, however, only certain documents were
filed.
7. The learned Tribunal, after considering the matter, returned a
finding under issue No.1 that the child (Krishna) had died due to injuries
ANKIT
2026.09.03 17:57
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
High Court, Chandigarh

FAO-335-2024 (O&M) -4-
suffered by him in a roadside accident, which occurred on 19.04.2019, due
to rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle by Malkit Singh @
Meeta.
7.1 As regards compensation, the learned Tribunal placed reliance
upon a judgment of this Court in case of “Shanti Devi and another vs.
Rakesh Kumar and others” 2017(2) PLR 562 , and held that the claimants
are entitled to the compensation of Rs.3,00,000/-, on account of death of
their minor son (Krishna). The learned Tribunal further placed reliance upon
judgment rendered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of “National
Insurance Company Limited vs. Pranay Sethi and others”, AIR 2017 SC
5157 , so as to grant compensation of Rs.15,000/- towards funeral expenses
and another Rs.15,000/- on account of loss of estate. That apart, the
claimants have been further held entitled to receive filial consortium at the
rate of Rs.40,000/-. The learned Tribunal has granted following
compensation to the claimants:-
Sr. No. Heads Compensation awarded
(i) Loss of death of minor child, Rs.3,30,000/-
last rites and loss of estate
(ii) Loss of Consortium Rs.40,000/-
Total Compensation awarded Rs.3,70,000/- alongwith interest
@ 7.5% per annum from the
date of filing of the claim
petition till payment
7.2 The learned Tribunal held the driver, owner as well as Insurance
Company as jointly and severally liable to make the payment of the
compensation amount to the claimants. The learned Tribunal further awarded
ANKIT
2026.09.03 17:57
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
High Court, Chandigarh

FAO-335-2024 (O&M) -5-
interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of claim petition till its
realization.
8. In the aforesaid circumstances, the appellants-claimants have
filed the present appeal.
9. Learned counsel appearing for the appellants has submitted that
the learned Tribunal below has erred in granting a meager compensation. It
is submitted that the award passed by the learned Tribunal below, is contrary
to the settled principles of law that a minor child, who suffered death or
permanent disability in a motor vehicular accident cannot be placed in a
same category as a non-earning individual for the purposes of assessing the
amount of compensation because the child was not engaged in the gainful
employment at the time of the accident. It is submitted that the computation
of the compensation under the head of loss of income, ought to be made by
adopting, at least the minimum wages payable to a skilled workman, as
notified for the relevant period, in the respective State, where the cause of
action has arisen. Reference is made to the judgment passed by the Hon’ble
Supreme Court of India in case of “Kajal Vs. Jagdish Chand and others”,
(2020) 4 SCC 413 . A further reference is made to the judgment rendered by
the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of “Hitesh Nagjibhai Patel Vs.
Bababhai Nagjibhai Rabari and another”, 2025 (4) Apex Court
Judgments (SC) 36 .
9.1 On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the respondent
No.3 (Insurance Company) has opposed the aforesaid submission made on
behalf of the appellants/claimants and prayed for dismissal of the appeal.
ANKIT
2026.09.03 17:57
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
High Court, Chandigarh

FAO-335-2024 (O&M) -6-
10. I have heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and
perused the paperbook with their able assistance.
11. At the outset, it is required to be noticed that the judgment
relied upon by the learned counsel for the appellant in the case of Kajal
(supra) has been considered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of
Hitesh Nagjibhai Patel (supra), wherein the following observations have
been made:-
“15. For the purpose of emphasis, it is again clarified here
that when a Tribunal or the High Court in appeal, is concerned
with the case involving a child having suffered injury or having
passed away, the calculation of loss of income necessarily has
to be made on the matric of minimum wages payable to a
skilled worker in the respective State at the relevant point of
time. It is our hope that this restatement helps avoiding such
errors and thereby obviates the necessity of this Court's
interference, applying well-established principles of law.”
12. Therefore, keeping in view the settled position of law that, in a
case involving death of a minor child, the compensation is required to be as-
sessed by taking the minimum wages payable to a skilled worker in the con-
cerned State at the relevant time, the compensation awarded by the learned
Tribunal vide award dated 19.07.2023 cannot be sustained. Concededly, the
minor child (Krishna) expired in a roadside accident on 19.04.2019 at
Ambala (Haryana). The deceased-Krishna was three years of age at the time
of the accident and, therefore, the income is liable to be assessed on the basis
of the minimum wages applicable to a skilled worker in the State of Haryana
on the date of the accident.
ANKIT
2026.09.03 17:57
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
High Court, Chandigarh

FAO-335-2024 (O&M) -7-
12.1 Accordingly, in order to assess the fair compensation, this
Court adverts to the prevailing minimum wages for a skilled worker in the
State of Haryana, as on the date of accident i.e. 19.04.2019, which would be
Rs.10,382.4/- per month. Further, future prospects of 40% are to be added
and 50% amount is to be deducted for personal expenses. Now, keeping in
view the age of the deceased – Krishna as 3 years, multiplier of 18 is liable
to be applied. Since, accident occurred on 19.04.2019, accordingly, keeping
in view judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in case of “National
Insurance Company Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi and others”, 2017 (4)
R.C.R. (Civil) 1009; loss of consortium is to be provided to each of the
appellants-claimants @ Rs.40,000/- (each). Still further, Rs.15,000/- is to be
awarded on account of loss of estate and another Rs.15,000/- towards funeral
expenses.
13. The revised computation, therefore, is provided as under:
Sr Heads of Compensation Details of relief granted
No.
1 Annual income of Rs. 10382.4 × 12 = Rs. 1,24,588.8/-
deceased-(A)
2. Future prospects 40%-(B) 40% of Rs.1,24,588.8 = Rs.49,835.52/-
3. Less personal expenses 1/2 of Rs. 1,74,424.32 = Rs. 87,212.16/-
(1/2)- (C)
4. Annual loss of Rs. 87,212.16/-
dependency A+B-C
5. Multiplier 18
6. Total loss of dependency Rs. 15,69,818.88/-
7. Loss of consortium Rs. 40,000 × 2 = Rs. 80,000/-
8. Loss of estate Rs. 15,000/-
9. Funeral expenses Rs. 15,000/-
10 Total compensation Rs. 16,79,818.88/-
11 Interest 7.5%
ANKIT
2026.09.03 17:57
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
High Court, Chandigarh

FAO-335-2024 (O&M) -8-
14. Accordingly, on re-computation, the claimants are held entitled
to a total compensation of Rs.16,79,818.88/- (rounded of to Rs.16,79,819/- ),
as detailed in para No.13 hereinabove, as against Rs.3,70,000/- awarded by
the learned Tribunal. The enhanced amount of compensation
i.e. ( Rs.16,79,819 - Rs.3,70,000/- = Rs.13,09,819/-) shall carry interest at the
rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till its
realization .
15. Consequently, award dated 19.07.2023 passed by the learned
Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ambala, is modified to the aforesaid
extent. The respondents shall be jointly and severally liable to pay the
comensation, however, since the offending vehicle was insured by
respondent No.3 – Insurance Company; the enhanced compensation shall be
paid by respondent No.3 (Insurance Company) to the claimants. The
enhanced amount shall be paid within a period of eight weeks from the date
of receipt of a certified copy of this order.
16. The present appeal is disposed of in aforestated terms.
17. All pending application(s), if any, shall also stand closed.
(HARSH BUNGER)
02.09.2026 JUDGE
Ankit
Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No
Whether reportable: Yes/No
ANKIT
2026.09.03 17:57
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
High Court, Chandigarh