UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD vs JEET SINGH

Court
High Court of Himachal Pradesh

High Court of H.P.
1 2026:HHC:30108
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA.
        FAO (MV) No. 248 of 2017
Reserved on : 14.07.2026
         Decided on : 22.07.2026
Uploaded on : 22.07.2026
United India Insurance Company Ltd.            ...Appellant
Versus
Jeet Singh & Others            ...Respondents
  
Coram
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh, Judge.
1
Whether approved for reporting?   Yes.
For the appellant:   Mr. Jagdish Thakur, Advocate. 
For the respondents:   Ms.   Anu   Tuli   Azta,   Advocate,
for respondents No. 1 to 3.
None   for   remaining
respondents. 
Virender Singh, Judge  
Appellant­United   India   Insurance   Company   Ltd.
has filed the present appeal, under Section 173 of the Motor
Vehicles Act (hereinafter referred to as ‘the M.V. Act’), against
the   award   dated   21.01.2017,   passed   by   learned   Motor
1
Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
::: Downloaded on - 22/07/2026 11:06:09 :::CIS

High Court of H.P.
2 2026:HHC:30108
Accident Claims Tribunal­IV, Shimla,  District  Shimla, H.P.
(hereinafter referred to as ‘the Tribunal’), in MAC Petition RBT
No. 75­S/2 of 2015/11, titled as ‘Jeet Singh & Others Versus
United India Insurance Company Ltd. & Others’.  
2. By   way   of   the   award,   dated   21.01.2017,   the
learned Tribunal has allowed the petition filed by respondents
No. 1 to 3 and awarded a sum of Rs. 9,99,800/­, along with
interest at the rate of 9% per annum, from the date of filing of
the petition, till the deposit of the awarded amount.   The
ultimate liability to pay the compensation has been fastened
upon the appellant­Insurance Company. 
3. For the sake of convenience, the parties to the
present   are, hereinafter referred to, in the same manner,
lis,
as were, referred to, by the learned Tribunal.
STAND   OF   THE   PETITIONERS   BEFORE   LEARNED
TRIBUNAL:
4. Brief facts, leading to filing of the present appeal,
before   this   Court,   as   borne   out   from   the   record,   may   be
summed up, as under:­
4.1 The   petitioners   have   filed   the   petition   under
Section   166   of   M.V.   Act,   against   the   respondents,   being
::: Downloaded on - 22/07/2026 11:06:09 :::CIS

High Court of H.P.
3 2026:HHC:30108
insurer, as well as, LRs of driver­cum­owner of vehicle no.
HP62A­0256 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the offending vehicle’),
seeking compensation on account of death of Sh. Deepak, in
a road side accident, which had taken place on 20.07.2011,
at   about   11:45   pm,   near   Chetu   Dhaba,   Theog,   District
Shimla, H.P., involving the offending vehicle.
4.2 According to the petitioners, Sh. Deepak was son
of petitioners No. 1 and 2 and brother of petitioner No. 3, who
was about 24 years of age at the time  of death and was
earning Rs. 10,000/­ per month.
4.3 According to the petitioners, the offending vehicle
was   hired   by   Sh.   Deepak,   to   transport   his   apple   crop   to
Chandigarh, from his native village and he was also coming
back in the offending vehicle to Devri Khaneti.  The accident
had taken place due to rash and negligent driving of Chander
Prakash, predecessor­in­interest of respondents No. 2(a) to
2(c).   The information regarding the accident was given to
Police   Station   Theog,   where   FIR   No.   162/2011,   dated
21.07.2011, was registered.
::: Downloaded on - 22/07/2026 11:06:09 :::CIS

High Court of H.P.
4 2026:HHC:30108
4.4 Since, the accident had solely been attributed to
rash   and   negligent   driving   of   the   driver   of   the   offending
vehicle,   as   such,   the   petitioners   have   sought   amount   of
compensation of Rs. 10,00,000/­, from the respondents.
STAND   OF   THE   RESPONDENTS   BEFORE   LEARNED
TRIBUNAL:
5. When put to notice, the claim petition has been
contested by the respondents.
5.1 Insurance company­respondent No. 1 has filed the
reply, taking preliminary objections, that the claim petition is
not maintainable; the deceased was sitting in the offending
vehicle   as   unauthorized   passenger;   the   vehicle   was   being
driven   in   violation   of   the   terms   and   conditions   of   the
insurance policy; the offending vehicle was not authorized to
carry passengers; and the driver of the offending vehicle was
not having a valid and effective driving license.
5.2 On merits, the contents of the claim petition have
been denied, mainly for want of knowledge.
6. Respondents   No.   2(a)   to   2(c)   have   filed   their
separate reply, by admitting the factum of accident.   They
have also reiterated the fact that Deepak had hired the vehicle
::: Downloaded on - 22/07/2026 11:06:09 :::CIS

High Court of H.P.
5 2026:HHC:30108
at  Theog   Bazar,   for   transportation   of   peas   seeds   bags   for
agricultural purpose to his native village.  Rest of the contents
have been denied.
7. As such, a prayer has been made to dismiss the
petition.
PROCEEDINGS BEFORE LEARNED TRIBUNAL:
8. From the pleadings of the parties, the following
issues were framed by the learned Tribunal on 12.04.2013:­
1.  Whether   deceased   died   due   to   rash   and   negligent
driving of vehicle having registration No. HP62A­0266,
as alleged? OPP
2. If issue No. 1 is proved in affirmative to what amount of
compensation   petitioners   are   entitled   and   against
whom, as alleged? OPP
3. Whether deceased was travelling as unauthorized and
gratuitous passenger, as alleged? OPR­1
4. Whether   driver   of   vehicle   did   not   hold   valid   and
effective   driving   licence   at   the   time   of   accident,   as
alleged? OPR­1
5. Whether vehicle was driven without valid R.C. route
permit and fitness certificate at the time of accident, as
alleged? OPR­1
6. Whether vehicle was driven in violation of terms and
conditions of insurance policy, as alleged? OPR­1
7. Whether   petitioners   have   no   cause   of   action   to   file
present petition as alleged? OPR­1 and OPR­2 ABC.
8. Relief. 
9. Thereafter, the parties to the     were directed to
lis
adduce evidence.
::: Downloaded on - 22/07/2026 11:06:09 :::CIS

High Court of H.P.
6 2026:HHC:30108
10. After   the   closure   of   evidence   and   hearing   the
learned   counsel   appearing   for   the   parties,   the   learned
Tribunal has allowed the petition, as referred to above, by
fastening   the   liability   upon   respondent   No.   1­Insurance
Company. 
STAND   OF   THE   INSURANCE   COMPANY   BEFORE   THIS
COURT:
11. Feeling aggrieved from the award, the Insurance
Company of the offending vehicle has preferred the present
appeal, before this Court, on the ground that the learned
Tribunal   has   wrongly   decided   issue   No.   3   against   the
appellant­Insurance   Company,   as   it   has   been   proved   that
Deepak Kumar hired the vehicle in question from Parwanoo
to Devri Khaneti, for bringing apples from his native place
and as such, at the relevant time, he was travelling in the
vehicle as hirer of the vehicle and not as the owner of the
goods.  The Insurance Company has relied upon the provision
of   Section   147   of   M.V.   Act   and   prayed   that   Insurance
Company is not liable to indemnify the owner.
11.1 Findings   have   further   been   assailed,   on   the
ground, that the admission made by the petitioners, qua the
::: Downloaded on - 22/07/2026 11:06:09 :::CIS

High Court of H.P.
7 2026:HHC:30108
fact, that at the relevant time, the deceased was travelling in
the offending vehicle, as the hirer of the vehicle, has not been
considered by the learned Tribunal.
11.2 The award has also been assailed, on the ground,
that learned Tribunal has wrongly taken the income of the
deceased as Rs. 5400/­ per month, in the year 2011, that too,
when the petitioners have not filed any documentary proof
with respect to the income of the deceased.  As such, learned
counsel   appearing   for   the   appellant   submitted   that   the
learned   Tribunal   ought   to   have   taken  the   income,   on   the
basis   of   minimum   wages,   prevailing   at   the   relevant   time.
According to him, in the year 2011, the minimum wages of
unskilled labourer were not more than Rs. 3300/­ per month.
11.3 Similarly, the findings of the learned Tribunal qua
the   fact  that  the   learned   Tribunal   has   added   50%   in   the
income   of   the   deceased,   whereas,   he   was   not   working   in
regular establishment, and as such, award is liable to  be
modified.
11.4 Award has also been challenged on the ground
that wrong multiplier has been applied.  Similarly, according
::: Downloaded on - 22/07/2026 11:06:09 :::CIS

High Court of H.P.
8 2026:HHC:30108
to the appellant­Insurance Company, learned Tribunal has
wrongly awarded Rs. 1,00,000/­, on account of loss of love
and affection.
11.5 The   rate   of   interest   has   also   been   assailed   by
pleading that the rate of interest ought not to have been more
than 7.5%. 
12. On all these grounds, Mr. Jagdish Thakur, learned
counsel for the appellant, has prayed that the appeal may
kindly   be   allowed   by   exonerating   the   Insurance   Company
from indemnifying the owner of the offending vehicle. 
13. Per contra, it has been argued by Ms. Anu Tuli
Azta, Advocate, appearing for the petitioners, that the amount
of compensation may kindly be enhanced so the same may
fall within the definition of “just compensation”.
DISCUSSION & ANALYSIS:
14. In   order   to   decide   the   appeal   preferred   by   the
Insurance Company, evidence of the parties, is liable to be
discussed.
15. After   framing   the   issues,   petitioner   No.   1   put
appearance in the witness box and filed his duly sworn­in
::: Downloaded on - 22/07/2026 11:06:09 :::CIS

High Court of H.P.
9 2026:HHC:30108
affidavit  Ext.  PW1/A,   which  is  based  upon   the  averments
made in the petition.  According to him, his son had gone to
Parwanoo and  hired  the  offending  vehicle for carrying   the
apple boxes from his native place to Chandigarh.  When, the
offending   vehicle   reached   near   Chetu   Dhaba   at   Theog,   at
about 11:45 pm, then, due to rash and negligent driving of
Chander Prakash, the offending vehicle met with the accident,
in which, his son, had sustained injuries and expired.  In the
cross­examination, he has denied the suggestion that his son
was unauthorized passenger.
16. FIR has been proved by PW­2 HC Yogesh Kumar,
as Ext. PW2/A.
17. PW­3   Dr.   M.M.   Verma,   proved   the   postmortem
report of Deepak Kumar, as Ext. PW3/A.
18. The   Insurance   Company   has   examined   Sub
Inspector   Naresh   Kumar,   RW­1,   who   has   investigated   the
case FIR No. 162/11, dated 21.07.2011 and submitted the
untraced   report   in   the   Court   of   learned   JMFC   Theog.
According to him, as per his investigation, it was found that
the   accident   had   taken   place   due   to   rash   and   negligent
::: Downloaded on - 22/07/2026 11:06:09 :::CIS

High Court of H.P.
10 2026:HHC:30108
driving   of   Chander   Prakash.     He   was   not   having   driving
licence at the relevant time, as from the spot, neither, the
driving licence has been found, nor the same was found at
near by places, despite search conducted by them. Brother of
deceased was also inquired, but, the driving licence was also
not found, at his native place.  This witness was not present
at the time of accident.  He reached there after about half an
hour.
19. RW­2 Shashi Sen, was appointed as investigator
and according to him, Deepak was found to be travelling in
the   vehicle   as   gratuitous   passenger,   which   is   against   the
terms   and   conditions   of   the   insurance   policy.     He   has
tendered the insurance policy Ext. R­X.  He has denied that
Deepak   hired   the   vehicle   for   transporting   apples   from   his
village.
20. RW­3   Sh.   P.S.   Chandel,   was   appointed   as
investigator in this case, who has submitted his report Ext.
RW3/A.     According   to   him,   it   was   found   during   the
investigation that driver was not having any driving licence.
This witness has not recorded the statement of any witness
::: Downloaded on - 22/07/2026 11:06:09 :::CIS

High Court of H.P.
11 2026:HHC:30108
and no goods were found at the spot.   He has feigned his
ignorance about the fact that deceased had hired the vehicle
for carrying his goods from Parwanoo to his native village
Devri Khaneti.
21. RW­4 Ishan Mehta, is the son of the driver­cum­
owner.  According to him, when the accident in question had
taken place, then, seeds of peas were loaded.  After the death
of his father, case for compensation was filed and he has
tendered the copy of same as Ext. DX­2.
22. This is the entire evidence, which has been led by
the parties before the learned Tribunal.
23. The   learned   Tribunal   has   negated   the   plea   of
insurance   company   that   Deepak   was   travelling   in   the
offending vehicle as gratuitous passenger, whereas, it is the
specific  plea  of  the  petitioners  that  their  son  Deepak  had
hired the vehicle for transporting the apple crop from their
native place to Chandigarh and on the way to their native
place, offending vehicle met with an accident, at place Chetu
Dhaba at Theog.  It is not the case of any of the parties that
the vehicle was not on its way to village Devri Khaneti.
::: Downloaded on - 22/07/2026 11:06:09 :::CIS

High Court of H.P.
12 2026:HHC:30108
24. The accident in question had taken place in the
month of July, which is admittedly apple season in the area,
where deceased was residing with his parents.  The father of
deceased Deepak, when appeared in the witness box as PW­1
and filed affidavit Ext. PW1/A, has also taken the said stand
and except putting a query to him that his son was sitting in
the   vehicle   as   unauthorized   passenger,   no   other   relevant
suggestion was given to him.
25. The father of the deceased specifically stated that
vehicle was hired for taking the apple boxes from their native
village to Chandigarh.  Once, the vehicle was hired by Deepak
for   transporting   the   apple   crop   from   his   native   place   to
Chandigarh, then, it was not unusual for the person, who
had hired the vehicle, to travel to his native place in the same
vehicle.  Apart from the driver, he was the only person, who
was travelling in the offending vehicle and as per his father,
he had to go along with apple boxes to Chandigarh.  As such,
Deepak cannot be said to be unauthorized passenger in the
goods vehicle and he was travelling in the vehicle as owner of
::: Downloaded on - 22/07/2026 11:06:09 :::CIS

High Court of H.P.
13 2026:HHC:30108
the goods, to be transported in the offending vehicle, from
Devri Khaneti to Chandigarh.
26. The   Insurance   Company   could   not   shatter   the
evidence of PW­1.   The proceedings under the M.V. Act are
summary in nature, where, the liability of tort feasor is to be
fixed   on   the   touchstone   of   preponderance   of   probabilities.
Even, from the statement of PW­1, the stand of the petitioners
is   proved   on   the   touchstone   of   the   preponderance   of
probabilities, then the act of deceased Deepak to travel in the
vehicle, which was hired by him for transporting his apple
crop to Chandigarh is natural.   Situation would have been
otherwise, had there been more than one passenger in the
vehicle.   A person, who sat in the vehicle, after hiring the
same   for   transporting   the   goods,   does   not   fall   within   the
definition   of   gratuitous   passenger,   or   unauthorized
passenger.
27. The   term   ‘gratuitous   passenger’   has   not   been
defined in the M.V. Act, however, it means that ‘a person who
had taken lift’ or ‘someone is obliging other person’.   It is
neither the case of the petitioners nor the case of respondents
::: Downloaded on - 22/07/2026 11:06:09 :::CIS

High Court of H.P.
14 2026:HHC:30108
No. 2(a) to 2(c), that deceased Deepak was travelling in the
vehicle after taking lift in the same, whereas, it is the specific
stand of the petitioners that Deepak had hired the offending
vehicle for transporting the apple crop (goods) from his native
place Devri Khaneti to Chandigarh.  
28. In this case, it has vehemently been argued by
learned counsel for the Insurance Company­appellant that it
is unusual that a person would hire the vehicle at Parwanoo,
whereas   the   driver­cum­owner   is   resident   of   his   village.
Above arguments, are not liable to be accepted as held above.
The accident in question had taken place, when the apple
season was on its peak and it is not unusual for deceased to
hire the vehicle from Parwanoo, which is the entry point of
State of Himachal Pradesh.
29. So far as the decision of this Court in “ National
Insurance Co. Ltd. Versus Maghi Ram and others, 2010
ACJ 2096 ”, is concerned, with due respect, the law laid down
in the said case, is not applicable in the present case, as the
accident had taken place in the month of July, which is peak
season of apple crop, whereas, in  Maghi Ram’s  case (supra),
::: Downloaded on - 22/07/2026 11:06:09 :::CIS

High Court of H.P.
15 2026:HHC:30108
the evidence was not there that the hirer of the vehicle had
purchased the apple crates.  In view of the above discussion,
this Court is of the view that the learned Tribunal has rightly
decided issue No. 3 and those findings do not require any
interference by this Court.
30. The Insurance Company, in the present case, has
also   assailed   the   award   on   the   ground   of   quantum   of
compensation.  According to the Insurance Company, in the
absence   of   any   evidence   qua   the   earnings   of   deceased
Deepak, during his lifetime, as Rs. 10,000/­ per month, then,
the same is liable to be taken on the basis of minimum wages,
prevailing at the relevant time i.e. in the year 2011.
31. The father of deceased Deepak, when appeared in
the witness box, has tendered his affidavit, wherein he has
specifically stated that his son used to maintain the orchard
and earning Rs. 10,000/­ per month and according to him,
due   to   old   age,   he   could   not   look­after   the   said   orchard.
Although,   no   document   has   been   produced   to   prove   the
income of deceased Deepak, during his lifetime, but, in the
considered opinion of this Court, the learned Tribunal has
::: Downloaded on - 22/07/2026 11:06:09 :::CIS

High Court of H.P.
16 2026:HHC:30108
rightly taken the monthly income of deceased Deepak as Rs.
5,400/­ per month.  Age of deceased Deepak, at the time of
his death, has been proved as 23­24 years.  The same age has
been recorded in the postmortem report.   As such, learned
Tribunal has rightly taken his age 23 years.
32. The learned Tribunal has awarded 50% increase,
on account of future prospects of deceased Deepak.  The said
approach is not sustainable, in view of the decision of Hon’ble
Supreme Court in case titled “ National Insurance Company
Ltd. Versus Pranay Sethi & Others, (2017) 16 Supreme
Court Cases 680 ”. The relevant para 59.4 of the judgment,
has been reproduced, as under:­
“59.4 In case the deceased was self­employed 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.”
33. The 40% increase is liable to be made, as deceased
Deepak   was   working   in   unorganized   sector.     Thus,   his
monthly income come to Rs. 5400/­ + 40% = Rs. 7,560/­.   
The deceased was bachelor, as such, 50% amount is liable to
::: Downloaded on - 22/07/2026 11:06:09 :::CIS

High Court of H.P.
17 2026:HHC:30108
be deducted  on account  of  personal  expenses.    Thus,  his
contribution comes to Rs. 7,560/­ minus 50% = Rs. 3,780/­. 
34. The learned Tribunal has applied the multiplier of
‘18’, which, according to the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme
Court in “ Sarla Verma
  Vs Delhi Transport Corportation,
”, is the appropriate multiplier, applied in
2009 (6) SCC 121
the present case.  Thus, the loss of contribution comes to Rs.
3,780/­ x 12 x 18 = Rs. 8,16,480/­.
35. In this case, the learned Tribunal has awarded a
sum   of   Rs.   1,00,000/­,   on   account   of   ‘loss   of   love   and
affection’,   Rs.   25,000/­,   on   account   of   ‘funeral   charges’,
which are liable to be reduced, on account of   Pranay Sethi’s
case (supra).
36. In view of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court
in   Magma   General   Insurance   Company   Limited   versus
Nanu   Ram   alias   Chuhru   Ram   and   others,   reported   in
(2018) 18 Supreme Court Cases 130 , all the petitioners are
held   entitled   for   the   amount   of   loss   of   consortium.    The
relevant paras 21 to 24 of the judgment are reproduced, as
under:­
::: Downloaded on - 22/07/2026 11:06:09 :::CIS

High Court of H.P.
18 2026:HHC:30108
“21. A Constitution Bench of this Court in Pranay
Sethi 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:
21.1. Spousal consortium is generally defined as
rights   pertaining   to   the   relationship   of   a
husband­wife which allows compensation to the
surviving spouse for loss of "company, society,
co­operation, affection, and aid of the other in
every conjugal relation”. 
21.2. 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." 
21.3. 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 lose their child
during   their   lifetime.   Children   are   valued   for
their   love,   affection,   companionship   and   their
role in the family unit. 
22.   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
::: Downloaded on - 22/07/2026 11:06:09 :::CIS

High Court of H.P.
19 2026:HHC:30108
compensation for loss of the love, affection, care
and companionship of the deceased child. 
23.   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.   A   few
High Courts have awarded compensation on this
count.   However,   there   was   no   clarity   with
respect to the principles on which compensation
could be awarded on loss of filial consortium. 
24. The amount of compensation to be awarded
as consortium will be governed by the principles
of   awarding   compensation   under   `loss   of
consortium'   as   laid   down   in   Pranay   Sethi
(supra).   In   the   present   case,   we   deem   it
appropriate to award the father and the sister of
the deceased, an amount of Rs. 40,000 each for
loss of Filial Consortium.”
37. Thus, the entitlement of the petitioners is thus
adjudicated, as under:
1. Loss of income = Rs. 8,16,480/­
2. Loss of consortium =  Rs.1,20,000/­ 
3. Loss of estate = Rs. 15,000/­
4. Funeral Expenses = Rs. 15,000/­
_________________________________________________________
    Total = Rs. 9,66,480/­.
     ________________________________________________________
::: Downloaded on - 22/07/2026 11:06:09 :::CIS

High Court of H.P.
20 2026:HHC:30108
38. The   learned   Tribunal   has   awarded   the   rate   of
interest   at   the   rate   of   9%   per   annum,   which,   to   the
considered opinion of this Court, is liable to be reduced while
keeping   in   view   the   prevalent   rates   of   interest   in   the
nationalized banks.   Consequently, the same is reduced to
7.5% per annum.
39. No other point has been urged or argued.
40. Having glance of the above discussion, the appeal
of the Insurance Company is partly allowed, by reducing the
amount   of   compensation   from   Rs.   9,99,800/­   to   Rs.
9,66,480/­, and the rate of interest is also reduced from 9%
to 7.5% per annum, from the date of filing of the petition, till
the   deposit   of   award   amount.     The   award   passed   by   the
learned Tribunal is modified accordingly. 
41. Parties are left to bear their own costs.
42. Memo of costs be prepared accordingly.
43. Record be sent back.
                       (Virender Singh)
nd
22  July, 2026 Judge 
(Pramod Kumar)
        
::: Downloaded on - 22/07/2026 11:06:09 :::CIS