KAUSHALYA DEVI vs MEENA DEVI
- Court
- High Court of Himachal Pradesh
1 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
FAO(MV) No. 548 of 2016 with FAO(MV)
Nos. 549 to 558, 567, 568 of 2016, 319
to 322, 363, 365, 508, 538, 539, 578 of
2018, 65 and 232 of 2019, 98 of 2020,
61 to 66 and 128 of 2026.
Reserved on : 24.09.2026
Decided on : 16.10.2026
Uploaded on : 16.10.2026
1. FAO (MV) No.548 of 2016
The New India Assurance Company …….Appellant
Versus
Reema Devi & Others ...Respondents
2. FAO (MV) No.549 of 2016
The New India Assurance Company …….Appellant
Versus
Savitri Devi & Others ...Respondents
3. FAO (MV) No.550 of 2016
The New India Assurance Company …….Appellant
Versus
Satya Devi & Others ...Respondents
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
2 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
4. FAO (MV) No.551 of 2016
The New India Assurance Company …….Appellant
Versus
Kaushalya Devi & Others ...Respondents
5. FAO (MV) No.552 of 2016
The New India Assurance Company …….Appellant
Versus
Sheetla & Others ...Respondents
6. FAO (MV) No.553 of 2016
The New India Assurance Company …….Appellant
Versus
Manjeet Kaur & Others ...Respondents
7. FAO (MV) No.554 of 2016
The New India Assurance Company …….Appellant
Versus
Saroj Kumari & Others ...Respondents
8. FAO (MV) No.555 of 2016
The New India Assurance Company …….Appellant
Versus
Beena Devi & Others ...Respondents
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
3 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
9. FAO (MV) No.556 of 2016
The New India Assurance Company …….Appellant
Versus
Veena Devi & Others ...Respondents
10. FAO (MV) No.557 of 2016
The New India Assurance Company …….Appellant
Versus
Rekha Devi & Others ...Respondents
11. FAO (MV) No.558 of 2016
The New India Assurance Company …….Appellant
Versus
Rameshwari & Others ...Respondents
12. FAO (MV) No.567 of 2016
The New India Assurance Company …….Appellant
Versus
Dropti Devi & Others ...Respondents
13. FAO (MV) No.568 of 2016
The New India Assurance Company …….Appellant
Versus
Soma Devi & Others ...Respondents
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
4 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
14. FAO (MV) No.319 of 2018
Sheetla Devi & Another …….Appellants
Versus
Meena Kumari & Others ...Respondents
15. FAO (MV) No.320 of 2018
Beena Devi & Another …….Appellants
Versus
Meena Kumari & Others ...Respondents
16. FAO (MV) No.321 of 2018
Rameshwari & Another …….Appellants
Versus
Meena Kumari & Others ...Respondents
17. FAO (MV) No.322 of 2018
Kaushalya Devi & Another …….Appellants
Versus
Meena Kumari & Others ...Respondents
18. FAO (MV) No.363 of 2018
Dropati & Others …….Appellants
Versus
Meena Kumari & Others ...Respondents
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
5 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
19. FAO (MV) No.364 of 2018
Soma Devi & Others …….Appellants
Versus
Meena Kumari & Others ...Respondents
20. FAO (MV) No.508 of 2018
Manjeet Kaur & Another …….Appellants
Versus
Meena Kumari & Others ...Respondents
21. FAO (MV) No.538 of 2018
The New India Assurance Company …….Appellant
Versus
Vyasa Devi @ Bhaga Devi & Others ...Respondents
22. FAO (MV) No.539 of 2018
The New India Assurance Company …….Appellant
Versus
Kaushalya Devi @ Geeta Devi & Others ...Respondents
23. FAO (MV) No.578 of 2018
Vyasa Devi @ Bhaga Devi & Another …….Appellants
Versus
Meena Kumari & Others ...Respondents
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
6 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
24. FAO (MV) No.65 of 2019
Kaushalya Devi @ Geeta Devi & Another …….Appellants
Versus
Meena Kumari & Others ...Respondents
25. FAO (MV) No.232 of 2019
The New India Assurance Company …….Appellant
Versus
Dhruvender Surya & Others ...Respondents
26. FAO (MV) No.86 of 2020
The New India Assurance Company …….Appellant
Versus
Roshani Devi & Others ...Respondents
27. FAO (MV) No.61 of 2026
The New India Assurance Company …….Appellant
Versus
Deepan Devi & Others ...Respondents
28. FAO (MV) No.62 of 2026
The New India Assurance Company …….Appellant
Versus
Sunita Devi & Others ...Respondents
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
7 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
29. FAO (MV) No.63 of 2026
The New India Assurance Company …….Appellant
Versus
Kaushalya Devi & Others ...Respondents
30. FAO (MV) No.64 of 2026
The New India Assurance Company …….Appellant
Versus
Soma Devi & Others ...Respondents
31. FAO (MV) No.65 of 2026
The New India Assurance Company …….Appellant
Versus
Vidya Devi & Others ...Respondents
32. FAO (MV) No.66 of 2026
The New India Assurance Company …….Appellant
Versus
Phoolan Devi & Others ...Respondents
33. FAO (MV) No.128 of 2026
Satya Devi & Another …….Appellants
Versus
Meena Kumari & Others ...Respondents
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
8 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
Coram
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting? Yes.
1. FAO (MV) No.548 of 2016
For the appellant : Mr. B.M. Chauhan, Senior
Advocate with Mr. Amit Himalvi,
Advocate.
For the respondents : Mr. Naveen K. Dass, Advocate
for respondents No.1 to 4.
Mr. Tara Singh Chauhan, Senior
Advocate with Mr. Surya
Chauhan, Advocate for
respondent No.5.
Mr. Dhiraj Thakur, Advocate for
respondent No.6.
2. FAO (MV) No.549 of 2016
For the appellant : Mr. B.M. Chauhan, Senior
Advocate with Mr. Amit Himalvi,
Advocate.
For the respondents : Mr. Naveen K. Dass, Advocate
for respondents No.1 & 2.
Mr. Tara Singh Chauhan, Senior
Advocate with Mr. Surya
Chauhan, Advocate for
respondent No.3.
Mr. Dhiraj Thakur, Advocate for
respondent No.4.
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
9 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
3. FAO (MV) No.550 of 2016
For the appellant : Mr. B.M. Chauhan, Senior
Advocate with Mr. Amit Himalvi,
Advocate.
For the respondents : Mr. Rajiv Rai, Advocate, for
respondents No.1 & 2.
Mr. Tara Singh Chauhan, Senior
Advocate with Mr. Surya
Chauhan, Advocate for
respondent No.3.
Mr. Dhiraj Thakur, Advocate for
respondent No.4.
4. FAO (MV) No.551 of 2016
For the appellant : Mr. B.M. Chauhan, Senior
Advocate with Mr. Amit Himalvi,
Advocate.
For the respondents : Mr. Rajiv Rai, Advocate for
respondents No.1 & 2.
Mr. Tara Singh Chauhan, Senior
Advocate with Mr. Surya
Chauhan, Advocate for
respondent No.3.
Mr. Dhiraj Thakur, Advocate for
respondent No.4.
5. FAO (MV) No.552 of 2016
For the appellant : Mr. B.M. Chauhan, Senior
Advocate with Mr. Amit Himalvi,
Advocate.
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
10 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
For the respondents : Mr. Rajiv Rai, Advocate, for
respondents No.1 & 2.
Mr. Tara Singh Chauhan, Senior
Advocate with Mr. Surya
Chauhan, Advocate for
respondent No.3.
Mr. Dhiraj Thakur, Advocate for
respondent No.4.
6. FAO (MV) No.553 of 2016
For the appellant : Mr. B.M. Chauhan, Senior
Advocate with Mr. Amit Himalvi,
Advocate.
For the respondents : Mr. Rajiv Rai, Advocate for
respondents No.1 and 2.
Mr. Tara Singh Chauhan, Senior
Advocate with Mr. Surya
Chauhan, Advocate for
respondent No.3.
Mr. Dhiraj Thakur, Advocate for
respondent No.4.
7. FAO (MV) No.554 of 2016
For the appellant : Mr. B.M. Chauhan, Senior
Advocate with Mr. Amit Himalvi,
Advocate.
For the respondents : Mr. Naveen K. Dass, Advocate
for respondents No.1 & 2.
Mr. Tara Singh Chauhan, Senior
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
11 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
Advocate with Mr. Surya
Chauhan, Advocate for
respondent No.3.
Mr. Dhiraj Thakur, Advocate for
respondent No.4.
8. FAO (MV) No.555 of 2016
For the appellant : Mr. B.M. Chauhan, Senior
Advocate with Mr. Amit Himalvi,
Advocate.
For the respondents : Mr. Rajiv Rai, Advocate for
respondent No.1 and 2.
Mr. Tara Singh Chauhan, Senior
Advocate with Mr. Surya
Chauhan, Advocate for
respondent No.3.
Mr. Dhiraj Thakur, Advocate for
respondent No.4.
9. FAO (MV) No.556 of 2016
For the appellant : Mr. B.M. Chauhan, Senior
Advocate with Mr. Amit Himalvi,
Advocate.
For the respondents : Mr. Vikrant Chandel, Advocate
for respondents No.1 to 4.
Mr. Tara Singh Chauhan, Senior
Advocate with Mr. Surya
Chauhan, Advocate for
respondent No.5.
Mr. Dhiraj Thakur, Advocate for
respondent No.6.
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
12 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
10. FAO (MV) No.557 of 2016
For the appellant : Mr. B.M. Chauhan, Senior
Advocate with Mr. Amit Himalvi,
Advocate.
For the respondents : Mr. Naveen K. Dass, Advocate
for respondents No.1 to 5.
Mr. Tara Singh Chauhan, Senior
Advocate with Mr. Surya
Chauhan, Advocate for
respondent No.6.
Mr. Dhiraj Thakur, Advocate for
respondent No.7.
11. FAO (MV) No.558 of 2016
For the appellant : Mr. B.M. Chauhan, Senior
Advocate with Mr. Amit Himalvi,
Advocate.
For the respondents : Mr. Vijay Singh Bhatia,
Advocate, for respondents No.1
and 2.
Mr. Tara Singh Chauhan, Senior
Advocate with Mr. Surya
Chauhan, Advocate for
respondent No.3.
Mr. Dhiraj Thakur, Advocate for
respondent No.4.
12. FAO (MV) No.567 of 2016
For the appellant : Mr. B.M. Chauhan, Senior
Advocate with Mr. Amit Himalvi,
Advocate.
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
13 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
For the respondents : None for respondents No.1 to 5.
Mr. Tara Singh Chauhan, Senior
Advocate with Mr. Surya
Chauhan, Advocate for
respondent No.6.
Mr. Dhiraj Thakur, Advocate for
respondent No.7.
13. FAO (MV) No.568 of 2016
For the appellant : Mr. B.M. Chauhan, Senior
Advocate with Mr. Amit Himalvi,
Advocate.
For the respondents : Mr. Naveen K. Dass, Advocate
for respondents No.1 to 4.
Mr. Tara Singh Chauhan, Senior
Advocate with Mr. Surya
Chauhan, Advocate for
respondent No.5.
Mr. Dhiraj Thakur, Advocate for
respondent No.6.
14. FAO (MV) No.319 of 2018
For the appellants : Mr. Rajiv Rai, Advocate.
For the respondents : Mr. Tara Singh Chauhan, Senior
Advocate with Mr. Surya
Chauhan, Advocate for
respondent No.1.
Mr. Dhiraj Thakur, Advocate for
respondent No.2.
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
14 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
Mr. B.M. Chauhan, Senior
Advocate with Mr. Amit Himalvi,
Advocate, for respondent No.3.
15. FAO (MV) No.320 of 2018
For the appellants : Mr. Rajiv Rai, Advocate.
For the respondents : Mr. Tara Singh Chauhan, Senior
Advocate with Mr. Surya
Chauhan, Advocate for
respondent No.1.
Mr. Dhiraj Thakur, Advocate for
respondent No.2.
Mr. B.M. Chauhan, Senior
Advocate with Mr. Amit Himalvi,
Advocate, for respondent No.3.
16. FAO (MV) No.321 of 2018
For the appellants : Mr. Rajiv Rai, Advocate.
For the respondents : Mr. Tara Singh Chauhan, Senior
Advocate with Mr. Surya
Chauhan, Advocate for
respondent No.1.
Mr. Dhiraj Thakur, Advocate for
respondent No.2.
Mr. B.M. Chauhan, Senior
Advocate with Mr. Amit Himalvi,
Advocate, for respondent No.3.
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
15 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
17. FAO (MV) No.322 of 2018
For the appellants : Mr. Rajiv Rai, Advocate.
For the respondents : Mr. Tara Singh Chauhan, Senior
Advocate with Mr. Surya
Chauhan, Advocate for
respondent No.1.
Mr. Dhiraj Thakur, Advocate for
respondent No.2.
Mr. B.M. Chauhan, Senior
Advocate with Mr. Amit Himalvi,
Advocate, for respondent No.3.
18. FAO (MV) No.363 of 2018
For the appellants : Mr. Rajiv Rai, Advocate.
For the respondents : Mr. Tara Singh Chauhan, Senior
Advocate with Mr. Surya
Chauhan, Advocate for
respondent No.1.
Mr. Dhiraj Thakur, Advocate for
respondent No.2.
Mr. B.M. Chauhan, Senior
Advocate with Mr. Amit Himalvi,
Advocate, for respondent No.3.
19. FAO (MV) No.364 of 2018
For the appellants : Mr. Rajiv Rai, Advocate.
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
16 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
For the respondents : Mr. Tara Singh Chauhan, Senior
Advocate with Mr. Surya
Chauhan, Advocate for
respondent No.1.
Mr. Dhiraj Thakur, Advocate for
respondent No.2.
Mr. B.M. Chauhan, Senior
Advocate with Mr. Amit Himalvi,
Advocate, for respondent No.3.
20. FAO (MV) No.508 of 2018
For the appellants : Mr. Rajiv Rai, Advocate.
For the respondents : Mr. Tara Singh Chauhan, Senior
Advocate with Mr. Surya
Chauhan, Advocate for
respondent No.1.
Mr. Dhiraj Thakur, Advocate for
respondent No.2.
Mr. B.M. Chauhan, Senior
Advocate with Mr. Amit Himalvi,
Advocate, for respondent No.3.
21. FAO (MV) No.538 of 2018
For the appellant : Mr. B.M. Chauhan, Senior
Advocate with Mr. Amit Himalvi,
Advocate
For the respondents : Mr. Rajiv Rai, Advocate, for
respondent No.1 and 2.
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
17 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
Mr. Tara Singh Chauhan, Senior
Advocate with Mr. Surya
Chauhan, Advocate for
respondent No.3.
Mr. Dhiraj Thakur, Advocate for
respondent No.4.
22. FAO (MV) No.539 of 2018
For the appellant : Mr. B.M. Chauhan, Senior
Advocate with Mr. Amit Himalvi,
Advocate
For the respondents : Mr. Rajiv Rai, Advocate, for
respondent No.1 and 2.
Mr. Tara Singh Chauhan, Senior
Advocate with Mr. Surya
Chauhan, Advocate for
respondent No.3.
Mr. Dhiraj Thakur, Advocate for
respondent No.4.
23. FAO (MV) No.578 of 2018
For the appellants : Mr. Rajiv Rai, Advocate.
For the respondents : Mr. Tara Singh Chauhan, Senior
Advocate with Mr. Surya
Chauhan, Advocate for
respondent No.1.
Mr. Dhiraj Thakur, Advocate for
respondent No.2.
Mr. B.M. Chauhan, Senior
Advocate with Mr. Amit Himalvi,
Advocate, for respondent No.3.
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
18 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
24. FAO (MV) No.65 of 2019
For the appellants : Mr. Rajiv Rai, Advocate.
For the respondents : Mr. Tara Singh Chauhan, Senior
Advocate with Mr. Surya
Chauhan, Advocate for
respondent No.1.
Mr. Dhiraj Thakur, Advocate for
respondent No.2.
Mr. B.M. Chauhan, Senior
Advocate with Mr. Amit Himalvi,
Advocate, for respondent No.3.
25. FAO (MV) No.232 of 2019
For the appellant : Mr. B.M. Chauhan, Senior
Advocate with Mr. Amit Himalvi,
Advocate.
For the respondents : Mr. Pawan K. Thakur, Advocate,
for respondent No.1.
Mr. Dhiraj Thakur, Advocate for
respondent No.2.
Mr. Tara Singh Chauhan, Senior
Advocate with Mr. Surya
Chauhan, Advocate for
respondent No.3.
26. FAO (MV) No.86 of 2020
For the appellant : Mr. B.M. Chauhan, Senior
Advocate with Mr. Amit Himalvi,
Advocate.
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
19 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
For the respondents : Mr. Manjeet Sigh Pasreecha,
Advocate, vice Mr. G.R. Palsra,
Advocate, for respondent No.1.
Mr. Tara Singh Chauhan, Senior
Advocate with Mr. Surya
Chauhan, Advocate for
respondent No.2.
Mr. Dhiraj Thakur, Advocate for
respondent No.3.
27. FAO (MV) No.61 of 2026
For the appellant : Mr. B.M. Chauhan, Senior
Advocate with Mr. Amit Himalvi,
Advocate.
For the respondents : Mr. Sahil Singh Thakur,
Advocate, for respondents No.1
to 5.
Mr. Dhiraj Thakur, Advocate for
respondent No.6.
Mr. Tara Singh Chauhan, Senior
Advocate with Mr. Surya
Chauhan, Advocate for
respondent No.7.
28. FAO (MV) No.62 of 2026
For the appellant : Mr. B.M. Chauhan, Senior
Advocate with Mr. Amit Himalvi,
Advocate.
For the respondents : Mr. Sahil Singh Thakur,
Advocate, for respondents No.1
and 2.
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
20 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
Mr. Dhiraj Thakur, Advocate for
respondent No.3.
Mr. Tara Singh Chauhan, Senior
Advocate with Mr. Surya
Chauhan, Advocate for
respondent No.4.
29. FAO (MV) No.63 of 2026
For the appellant : Mr. B.M. Chauhan, Senior
Advocate with Mr. Amit Himalvi,
Advocate.
For the respondents : Mr. Sahil Singh Thakur,
Advocate, for respondents No.1,
2 and 4.
Mr. Dhiraj Thakur, Advocate for
respondent No.6.
Mr. Tara Singh Chauhan, Senior
Advocate with Mr. Surya
Chauhan, Advocate for
respondent No.7.
30. FAO (MV) No.64 of 2026
For the appellant : Mr. B.M. Chauhan, Senior
Advocate with Mr. Amit Himalvi,
Advocate.
For the respondents : Mr. Sahil Singh Thakur,
Advocate, for respondents No.1
to 4.
Mr. Dhiraj Thakur, Advocate for
respondent No.5.
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
21 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
Mr. Tara Singh Chauhan, Senior
Advocate with Mr. Surya
Chauhan, Advocate for
respondent No.6.
31. FAO (MV) No.65 of 2026
For the appellant : Mr. B.M. Chauhan, Senior
Advocate with Mr. Amit Himalvi,
Advocate.
For the respondents : Mr. Sahil Singh Thakur,
Advocate, for respondents No.1
to 3.
Mr. Dhiraj Thakur, Advocate for
respondent No.4.
Mr. Tara Singh Chauhan, Senior
Advocate with Mr. Surya
Chauhan, Advocate for
respondent No.5.
32. FAO (MV) No.66 of 2026
For the appellant : Mr. B.M. Chauhan, Senior
Advocate with Mr. Amit Himalvi,
Advocate.
For the respondents : None for respondents No.1 to 3.
Mr. Dhiraj Thakur, Advocate for
respondent No.4.
Mr. Tara Singh Chauhan, Senior
Advocate with Mr. Surya
Chauhan, Advocate for
respondent No.5.
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
22 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
33. FAO (MV) No.128 of 2026
For the appellants : Mr. Rajiv Rai, Advocate.
For the respondents : Mr. Tara Singh Chauhan, Senior
Advocate with Mr. Surya
Chauhan, Advocate for
respondent No.1.
Mr. Dhiraj Thakur, Advocate for
respondent No.2.
Mr. B.M. Chauhan, Senior
Advocate with Mr. Amit Himalvi,
Advocate, for respondent No.3.
Virender Singh, Judge
The abovetitled appeals are being disposed of by
the common judgment, as all these appeals have arisen out
of the accident, which, according to the admitted case of the
parties, had taken place on 24.09.2014, involving passenger
bus No.HP69A5103 (hereinafter referred as ‘the offending
vehicle’).
2. These appeals are being segregated in two
different categories, i.e., CategoryI will contain 23 appeals,
preferred by the New India Assurance Company, and;
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
23 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
CategoryII will contain 10 appeals preferred by the
petitioners, for enhancement of the compensation.
3. The Insurance Company has filed 23 appeals,
under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act (hereinafter referred
to as the M.V. Act) against the awards, passed by the Court
of learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bilaspur; learned
Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ghumarwin, District
Bilaspur and learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
Sundernagar, District Mandi (hereinafter referred to as 'the
Tribunal'), whereby, while allowing the claim petitions, the
liability to pay the compensation has been fastened upon the
Insurance Company.
4. This Court would first decide the appeals
preferred by the Insurance Company, by taking FAO No.548
of 2016, as lead case.
CATEGORYI
FAO No.548 of 2016
5. This appeal has been preferred by the Insurance
Company, against the award dated 01.09.2016 passed by
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
24 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
the learned Tribunal, in Claim Petition No.05/2 of 2015,
titled as ‘ Reema Devi and Others vs. Meena Kumari and
Others’ .
6. By way of the award dated 01.09.2016, the
learned Tribunal has allowed the claim petition filed by
respondents No.1 to 4, by awarding compensation to the
tune of Rs.12,71,600/, with interest at the rate of 7.5% per
annum from the date of filing of the petition till the date of
deposit of amount. The ultimate liability to pay the amount
of compensation has been fastened upon the Insurance
Company, with a direction to deposit the amount within a
period of two months, failing which, the Insurance Company
has also been held liable to pay interest at the rate of 12%
per annum, from the date of award.
7. For the sake of convenience, the parties to the lis ,
are hereinafter referred to, in the same manner, in which,
they were referred to, by the learned Tribunal.
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
25 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
8. Brief facts, leading to the filing of the present
appeal, before this Court, as borne out from the record, may
be summed up, as under:
8.1. The petitioners, being widow, daughters and
mother of Shri Pyare Lal have filed the above noted claim
petition against Meena Kumari and others, being owner,
driver, and insurer of the offending vehicle. The accident had
taken place on 24.09.2014, at about 8.30 a.m., near Rahian
(Auhar) in District Bilaspur (hereinafter referred to as ‘the
accident in question’) due to the rash and negligent driving
of respondent No. 2 Sunil Kumar.
8.2. According to the petitioners, Shri Pyare Lal was
about 42 years of age, at the time of his death in the
accident, in question. He was a priest/agriculturist/
horticulturist by profession and from all the above
occupations, he used to earn Rs.25,000/ per month.
8.3. According to the petitioners, on 24.09.2014, Shri
Pyare Lal was travelling in the offending vehicle from
Rishikesh to Bilaspur. When, the offending vehicle reached
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
26 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
near Rahian, the driver of the offending vehicle could not
control the same, due to high speed. Consequently, the
offending vehicle went off the road and fell into Satluj River.
In the accident, in question, Pyare Lal, along with 2022
persons lost their lives.
8.4. The information regarding the accident was given
to Police Station Ghumarwin, where, FIR No.199/14 dated
24.09.2014, under Sections 279, 337, 304A IPC, was
registered against respondent No.2.
8.5. According to the petitioners, they were having a
bright past and due to the untimely death of Shri Pyare Lal,
their future has now become bleak.
8.6. Since, the accident in question, has solely been
attributed to the rash and negligent driving of respondent
No.2 Sunil @ Sonu, as such, the petitioners have sought the
amount of compensation from the respondents.
9. When put to notice, the claim petition has been
contested by the respondents. Owner of the offending
vehiclerespondent No.1, has filed her separate reply, by
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
27 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
taking the preliminary objections that the claim petition is
not maintainable; claim petition is incomplete, vague and
does not disclose any cause of action; the offending vehicle
was insured with respondent No.3, by way of a commercial
package policy; and the accident, according to her, had
taken place due to the mechanical defect, which suddenly
developed in the offending vehicle.
9.1. On merits, the claim petition has been contested.
Registration of the FIR has been admitted, however, a plea
has been taken that the same has been registered on the
basis of false and frivolous facts. Rest of the contents have
been denied by controverting the allegations of rash and
negligent driving levelled against the driver.
10. Respondent No.2, driver of the offending vehicle
Sunil Kumar, filed his separate reply, in which, he has
admitted the factum of accident and registration of the FIR
against him. According to him, the accident, in question,
had taken place due to some mechanical defect, which had
occurred, in the offending vehicle, as, according to him, the
tyres of the moving bus had fallen in a pit, as a result of
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
28 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
which, a loud noise had occurred, in the vehicle, and there
was a large irrigation pipe lying on the road, due to which,
he could not negotiate the curve, and the offending vehicle
fell into the river. According to him, in the accident, in
question, he was neither rash, nor, negligent, but, the same
had taken place due to the reasons, as mentioned in the
reply.
11. Respondent No.3, Insurance company of the
offending vehicle has filed its separate reply, by taking the
preliminary objections that the insurance company is not
liable to pay the amount of compensation, as, the offending
vehicle was being permitted to ply, by the owner, in violation
of the terms and conditions of the insurance policy; the
driver of the offending vehicle was not having a valid and
effective driving license, at the time of accident; the offending
vehicle was being permitted to ply without any fitness
certificate, route permit and registration certificate, at the
relevant time; the offending vehicle was carrying more than
the double of its capacity; the petition is not maintainable;
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
29 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
and that the claim petition has been filed by the petitioners,
in collusion with respondents No.1 and 2.
12. On merits, the contents of the claim petition have
been denied for want of knowledge.
13. Thus, the respondents have prayed for the
dismissal of the claim petition.
14. From the pleadings of the parties, the following
issues were framed by the learned Tribunal, vide order dated
09.04.2015:
1. Whether on 24.09.2014 at 8.30 a.m. near Rahian
(Auhar) Bilaspur, Piare Lal dies on account of
rash and negligent driving of respondent No.2,
driver of bus No.HP69A5103? OPP
2. If issue No.1 above is proved in affirmative,
whether the petitioner is entitled for
compensation and if so, to what amount and from
whom?
OPP
3. Whether the petition is not maintainable?
OPR
4. Whether the offending vehicle was being driven
without any valid documents? OPR3
5. Whether respondent NO.2 was not having valid
and effective driving licence? OPR3
6. Whether there is collusion between petitioner and
respondents No.1 and 2? OPR3
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
30 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
7. Relief.
15. On the same day, the application, under Section
170 of M.V. Act, moved by the Insurance Company, was
allowed by the learned Tribunal.
16. After the closure of the evidence and after
hearing the learned counsel appearing for the parties, the
learned Tribunal has allowed the claim petition, as referred
to above.
17. Feeling aggrieved from the said award, Insurance
Company has filed the present appeal, assailing the liability
to pay the amount of compensation; mainly, on the ground
that as per the FIR Ex.RW1/A, there were more than 45
passengers travelling in the offending vehicle, out of which,
25 persons had died and 19 persons were seriously injured.
18. According to the Insurance Company, the learned
Tribunal has wrongly fastened the liability to pay the
amount of compensation, along with up to date interest, as,
while deciding issue No.5, learned Tribunal has wrongly
concluded that the driving license of Shri Sunil Kumar,
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
31 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
which has been produced, on record Ex.RW1/E is not
proved to be fake.
19. The said findings, according to the appellant
Insurance Company, are not based upon evidence, produced
on record, by the Insurance Company, as such, the same
require interference by this Court.
20. As per the case of the appellantInsurance
Company, the evidence has been produced by the Company
to prove that the driving license possessed by driver of the
offending vehicle was fake. According to the Insurance
Company, it has been proved that the driver of the offending
vehicle had produced, on record the driving license No.
DL/N/1290/2009/2010, issued on 11.04.2009 and the
police, on its investigation, found the said license to be fake
and accordingly, FIR No. 201 dated 27.09.2004 (sic) was
separately registered against the driver, under Sections 420,
407, 471, 474 of the Indian Penal Code, against respondent
No.2.
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
32 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
21. The award has further been assailed on the
ground that the evidence of the Insurance Company,
especially, the statements of RW3 and RW4, are sufficient
to conclude that the driver was possessing fake driving
license. According to the Insurance Company, RW4 is the
concerned official, from the office of RLA Una, from where,
the driving license of respondent No.2 was issued. He has
categorically stated that the driving license, pertaining to the
said number, has been issued, by the Authority to one Shri
Arun, son of Shri Balram Kumar, whereas, the name of
driver of the offending vehicle is Sunil Kumar son of Nand
Lal. The driver, Sunil Kumar has not appeared, in the
witness box to support his defence, as such, the adverse
inference is to be drawn against respondent No.2 by
concluding that the case set up by him the reply is not
correct.
22. The award has also been assailed on the ground
that the learned Tribunal has wrongly fastened the liability
to pay the amount of compensation upon the Insurance
Company, as, it has been proved that there were total 45
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
33 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
passengers, travelling in the offending vehicle, at the time of
accident, whereas, the seating capacity of the offending
vehicle was ‘21+2’. Relying upon the decision of Hon'ble
Supreme Court in NIC versus Anjana Shayam reported as
the Insurance Company has taken a plea
2007 ACJ 2129,
that the Company is liable to pay compensation, only in
respect of the number of passengers, who are covered under
the Insurance Policy, as per the registration certificate.
23. The other ground, on which the award has been
assailed, is that issue No.1 has also wrongly been decided,
by the learned Tribunal, as it has not been proved that the
driver of the offending vehicle was driving the same, in a
rash and negligent manner.
24. The award has further been assailed on the
ground that the learned Tribunal has failed to appreciate the
fact that there was overloading of the offending vehicle,
which, according to the learned counsel appearing for the
Insurance Company, is fundamental breach of the terms and
conditions of the insurance policy.
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
34 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
25. In addition to this, the awarded amount has also
been stated to be on the higher side and it has been prayed
that the same may kindly be reduced.
26. On the basis of the above facts, Shri B.M.
Chauhan, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Amit Himalvi
Advocate, appearing for the Insurance Company, has prayed
that the appeal may kindly be allowed, by exonerating the
Insurance Company from paying the amount of
compensation and the awarded amount may kindly be
reduced, accordingly.
27. Per contra, learned counsel representing the
owner and driver has supported the award and prayed that
the learned Tribunal has rightly considered the terms and
conditions of the insurance policy and has rightly fastened
the liability to pay the amount of compensation upon the
Insurance Company. As such, a prayer has been made to
dismiss the appeal.
28. Whereas, the learned counsel appearing for the
petitioners has also supported the award, but, prayed that
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
35 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
the ‘just compensation’ has not been awarded to the
petitioners. As such, it has been prayed that the same may
kindly be enhanced, so that the same could fall within the
definition of ‘just compensation’.
29. In order to decide the controversy, involved in the
present case, it will be just and appropriate for this Court, to
discuss the oral, as well as, documentary evidence, adduced
by the parties, before the learned Tribunal.
30. After framing of the issues, the petitioners have
examined PW1 HC Mahender Singh, who has proved the
copy of the FIR No.199/14, dated 24.09.2014, under
Sections 279, 337, 304A IPC, and Section 189 M.V. Act, as
Ex.PW1/A. This witness neither had written the FIR, nor,
investigated the matter.
31. In the cross examination by the learned counsel
appearing for the Insurance Company, this witness has
admitted that after completion of the investigation, charge
sheet has been filed before the Court of learned Judicial
Magistrate First Class Ghumarwin against respondent No.2,
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
36 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
Sunil Kumar. He has also admitted that against Sunil
Kumar, a separate FIR has already been registered, however,
chargesheet, in the said FIR, has not yet been filed. Lastly,
he has deposed that in the accident, in question, 25 people
had died and 19 were injured.
32. PW2, Rajinder Kumar has been examined as eye
witness to the accident. According to him, on 24.09.2014,
he was travelling in the offending vehicle. When, the
offending vehicle reached near Rahain, then, the driver of
the offending vehicle was driving the same at a very high
speed and could not control the same, due to which, the
offending vehicle rolled down from the road. The accident, in
question, had taken place due to negligence of the driver.
There were total 2022 people, travelling in the bus, some of
the persons were pedestrians and some people were fishing.
The bus had fallen upon the persons who were fishing. This
witness had boarded the bus from a place known as Chhat.
He has also admitted that the construction of four laning
was going on. He has admitted that he has heard the noise
of breaking some part.
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
37 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
33. PW3, Reema Devi deposed about the factual
position, as contained in the claim petition. Her evidence,
qua the accident, in question, is not relevant, as, she has
admitted that the accident, in question, had not taken place
in her presence.
34. PW4, Mani Ram has also been examined by the
petitioners to prove the accident, in question. This witness
has deposed that the accident, in question, had taken place
due to the fast driving of the driver of the offending vehicle,
as he could not control the same. This witness was also
travelling in the offending vehicle. At the time of accident,
there were about 2022 passengers in the offending vehicle.
35. PW5, Praduman Kumar has deposed that Piare
Lal was performing the religious ceremonies, as such, he
was earning Rs.25,000/ Rs.30,000/.
36. To rebut this evidence, respondent No.1, Meena
Kumari, appeared in the witness box and filed her affidavit,
Ex.RW1/A, in which, she has deposed that respondent No.2
was employed, as driver on the offending vehicle and when
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
38 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
he was employed, as driver, his driving license was checked,
by this witness, which was issued from RLA Una. She has
conducted his driving test and assuming his license to be
genuine, she has employed Sunil as driver. Respondent
No.2, Sunil was earlier working as driver with Krishan
Gopal. She has further deposed that the accident, in
question, had taken place due to the mechanical defect,
which, all of a sudden, had occurred, in the offending
vehicle, resulting in casualty of 18 to 20 persons. Lastly, she
has deposed that the documents of the offending vehicle
were in order, including the driving license of Sunil.
37. This witness has tendered in evidence the copy of
RC Ex.RW1/B, copy of route permit Ex.RW1/C, copy of
insurance policy Ex.RW1/D, copy of DL Ex.RW1/E and
time table Ex.RW1/F.
38. In the crossexamination, this witness has
deposed that she is matriculate and she is in the business of
transportation from the last 23 years. She has engaged
respondent No.2, as driver, on the salary of Rs.6000/, per
month and in addition to this, Rs.100/ per day, were being
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
39 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
paid to him as daily expenses. She has denied the
suggestion that she was knowing the fact that the driving
license of Sunil was forged. Voluntarily stated that his
driving license was valid. She has feigned her ignorance that
a person, who is having a valid license, owner used to pay
Rs.15,000/ per month. The bus owned by Krishan Gopal
was being plied on Bilaspur to Jamthal route. This witness
has not checked the driving license of Sunil online. But,
voluntarily stated that she had compared the license of Sunil
with the license of her husband and assuming the same, as
correct, Sunil was employed. She has denied the suggestion
that she was aware about the fact that the driving license of
Sunil was forged and despite this fact, she had employed
Sunil as driver. She has feigned her ignorance about the fact
that the police lodged FIR against Sunil, for possessing
forged license. Sunil was employed, by her, in the month of
January 2014. She has further deposed that when, Sunil
was employed, she and her husband had checked his
license.
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
40 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
39. RW2 Krishan Gopal deposed that he is
transporter by profession and running the business under
the name and style of Vande Mataram Bus Service. In the
month of September 2013, he had employed Sunil alias
Sonu, as driver, on bus No.HP697621. Prior to engaging
him, as driver, his driving test was conducted and his
license was checked, which was issued from RLA Una and
considering the same, to be genuine, he was employed as
driver. Sunil Kumar had worked with him for 23 months.
Thereafter, he has joined the services, as driver, on the
offending vehicle.
40. In the cross examination, this witness has
deposed that Sunil Kumar drove bus No.HP69A7621 on
Bilaspur to Jamthal route and he was satisfied with his
driving skill. He used to pay Rs.6000/ per month to Sunil.
After working for a period of two months with him, he has
left the job, as, he was not satisfied with the salary. He has
denied the suggestion that services of Sunil were terminated,
when, this witness came to know about the fact that his
driving license was forged. Lastly, this witness has deposed
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
41 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
that when, he had hired the services of Sunil, his driving test
was got conducted and his driving license was also checked.
41. RW3, HC Mohinder No.53 deposed that FIR
No.201 dated 27.09.2014 has been lodged with Police
Station Ghumarwin, against Sunil Kumar, under Sections
420, 467, 471 and 474 IPC and produced the copy of the
same, as Ex.RW3/A. The investigation of the case was
conducted by ASI Jagpal.
42. RW4 Kehar Singh, Kanoongo from the office of
SDM Una deposed that D.L. No.DL/N/1290/20092010, has
been issued, by their office, in the name of Shri Arun son of
Balram Kumar resident of Village Dehla, Tehsil and District
Una, on 03.11.2009 and said license has not been issued on
11.04.2009, in the name of any other person. He has proved
the abstract of the driving license as Ex.RW4/A.
43. In the crossexamination, this witness has
admitted that he did not deal with the registering and
licensing matters. He has not brought the record of
11.04.2009. Voluntarily stated that he has brought the
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
42 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
record, which is generally mentioned in the summons. He
has not brought the record of driving license DL No.1200
dated 11.04.2009.
44. So far as the documentary evidence is concerned,
Ex.PW1/A is copy of FIR No.199 dated 24.09.2014
registered with Police Station Ghumarwin, Ex.PW3/B is the
copy of the death certificate of Piare Lal, Ex.PW3/C is the
copy of the postmortem report, Ex.PW3/D is the copy of
Parivar register, Ex.RW1/B is the copy of the registration
certificate, Ex.RW1/C is the copy of part B, Ex.RW1/D is
the copy of the insurance policy, Ex.RW1/E is the copy of
the driving license of Sunil, Ex.RW1/F is the copy of the
time table, Ex.RW3/A is the copy of the FIR No.201 of 2014,
dated 27.09.2014, registered, under Sections 420, 407, 471,
474 IPC, and Ex.RW4/A is the abstract of the driving
license.
45. This is the entire evidence led by the parties,
before the learned Tribunal.
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
43 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
46. Perusal of the record shows that the Insurance
Company has moved the application, under Section 11 Rule
12 of the CPC on 31.03.2016. This said application was
dismissed by the learned Tribunal on 28.04.2016. The said
application was moved by the Insurance Company after
closing its evidence, on 03.03.2016.
47. The application, under Order 11 Rule 12 of the
CPC, although, has been held to be not maintainable, but,
even otherwise, if the said application is held to be
maintainable, then, considering the stage of the proceedings,
when the application was filed, it can be said that the
Insurance Company was not serious to obtain the original
driving license of respondent No.2, as according to the
applicant, there is only photocopy of the driving license,
which has been placed on record, without comparing the
same with original.
48. The learned counsel appearing for the Insurance
Company could not satisfy the judicial conscience of this
Court, as to what object the Insurance Company was going
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
44 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
to achieve, by moving the application, at the belated stage,
when, the case was listed for arguments.
49. As such, it does not lie in the mouth of the
learned counsel for the Insurance Company that despite
moving the application, under Order 11 Rule 12 of the CPC,
before the learned Tribunal, the original driving license was
not ordered to be produced on the record.
50. In this case, the Insurance Company has sought
exoneration from indemnifying the owner, on account of the
fact that the driving license of the driver, so produced, by the
owner as Ex.RW1/E was found to be fake and in this
regard, FIR, under Sections 420, 467, 471 & 474 IPC has
been registered against driver Sunil Kumar, son of Nand Lal.
51. By examining RW3, this fact has been
probablized by the Insurance Company, as, this witness, on
oath, has categorically stated that FIR No.201 dated
27.09.2014 was registered with Police Station Ghumarwin,
against Sunil Kumar, son of Nand Lal, however, the said
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
45 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
case was stated to be under investigation, when, this witness
appeared in the witness box on 17.12.2015.
52. Not only this, Insurance Company has also
examined RW4 Kesar Singh, to prove the fact that the
Driving Licence No.DL/N/1290/20092010, has been issued
by their office, in the name of Arun son of Balram Kumar
and same has not been issued in the name of any other
person and has produced certificate Ex.RW4/A.
53. No doubt, the Insurance Company has
probablized the fact that the driving license, copy of which
has been tendered, by the owner, as Ex. RW1/E, was found
to be fake and not issued by the authority, which has
purportedly been shown to have issued the same.
54. In this factual background, now, this Court
would proceed to consider the fact whether the facts, that
the driving license Ex.RW1/E was found to be fake and FIR
under Sections 420, 467, 471, 474 IPC, has been registered,
against respondent No. 2, would be sufficient to exonerate
the Insurance Company from paying the amount of
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
46 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
compensation, by holding that there is fundamental breach
of insurance policy.
55. The driver of the offending vehicle has not
bothered to put appearance, in the witness box, nor, has he
been summoned, by the Insurance Company to prove the
fundamental breach of the insurance policy. As such, the
evidence of owner Smt. Meena Kumari assumes significance,
in this regard.
56. Respondent No.1 Meena Kumari, in her reply,
has categorically taken a stand that she had engaged the
services of Sunil Kumar @ Sonu, as driver, on the offending
vehicle, after checking and inspecting his driving license. Not
only this, she has also pleaded that Sunil Kumar @ Sonu
was driving the bus for the last twothree years, from the
date, when, she filed the reply on 21.03.2015.
57. When the owner appeared, in the witness box, as
RW1 and filed her affidavit Ex.RW1/A, she has specifically
got recorded, in her affidavit that Sunil was engaged, by her,
on the offending vehicle, in the month of January 2014, and
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
47 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
when, his services were hired, his driving license was
perused, which was issued by RLA, Una. Thereafter, his
driving test was conducted and his driving license was
presumed to be genuine, as such, he was engaged. Not only
this, she has deposed that prior to engaging the services of
Sunil alias Sonu, he was working with Krishan Gopal on
Vande Matram bus.
58. When, the suggestion was given to this witness,
by the learned counsel appearing for the Insurance
Company that she was aware about the fact that the driving
license of Sunil was forged, she has denied the said
suggestion and stated that his license was genuine. She has
admitted that she has not checked the driving license of
Sunil online, but, genuinely stated that she compared the
license of Sunil with the license of her husband and
presuming the same to be genuine, she has engaged his
services. Even, in the crossexamination, by the learned
counsel appearing for the petitioners, she has reiterated the
fact that while engaging Sunil Kumar @ Sonu, as driver, she
and her husband checked his license.
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
48 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
59. Respondent No.1, has also examined Krishan
Gopal as RW2, with whom, Sunil was earlier working, as
driver. RW2 has deposed that in the month of September
2013, he has employed Sunil Kumar @ Sonu as bus driver
over the bus No.HP69A7621 and before engaging his
services, his driving test was conducted, his license was
checked, which was issued by RLA, Una, and after
presuming the same to be correct, Sunil Kumar was
employed as driver. He has also given a certificate to Sunil
by deposing that Sunil was a good driver. Despite lengthy
crossexamination, nothing material could be elicited, by the
Insurance Company, from this witness.
60. In order to be absolved from indemnifying the
owner, Insurance Company has not only to prove that the
driving license of the driver was fake, but, the knowledge of
insured is sine qua non. In other words, it can be said that
the breach of contract of insurance has to be assumed,
when the Insurance Company, could prove that the owner
was knowing the fact or reason to believe that the driving
license of the driver engaged by him/her is fake and despite
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
49 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
knowing the said fact, he or she has handed over the vehicle
to such a person to drive the vehicle.
61. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Nirmala Kthari
versus United India Insurance Co. Ltd., AIR 2020 SC
has held that employer, while hiring a driver, is
1193
required to see if driver has a driving licence, prima facie ,
appearing genuine and he is not expected to ascertain
veracity of the same. Relevant paragraphs 11 and 12 of the
judgment, are reproduced, as under:
“11. While hiring a driver the employer is expected
to verify if the driver has a driving licence. If the
driver produces a licence which on the face of it
looks genuine, the employer is not expected to
further investigate into the authenticity of the
licence unless there is cause to believe otherwise.
If the employer finds the driver to be competent to
drive the vehicle and has satisfied himself that
the driver has a driving licence there would be no
breach of Section 149(2)(a)(ii) and the Insurance
Company would be liable under the policy. It
would be unreasonable to place such a high onus
on the insured to make enquiries with RTOs all
over the country to ascertain the veracity of the
driving licence. However, if the Insurance
Company is able to prove that the owner/insured
was aware or had notice that the licence was fake
or invalid and still permitted the person to drive,
the insurance company would no longer continue
to be liable.
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
50 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
12. On facts, in the instant case, the
Appellant/Complainant had employed the Driver,
Dharmendra Singh as driver after checking his
driving licence. The driving licence was purported
to have been issued by the licencing authority,
Sheikh Sarai, Delhi, however, the same could not
be verified as the concerned officer of the licencing
authority deposed that the record of the licence
was not available with them. It is not the
contention of the Respondent/ Insurance
Company that the Appellant/complainant is guilty
of willful negligence while employing the driver.
The driver had been driving competently and
there was no reason for the
Appellant/Complainant to doubt the veracity of
the driver’s licence. In view of above facts and
circumstances, the impugned judgment is not
liable to be sustained and is hereby set aside. The
appeals accordingly stand allowed. The
respondent/ Insurance Company is held liable to
indemnify the appellant.
62. Similar view has again been taken by the Hon’ble
Supreme Court in
Civil Appeal No.4919 of 2022 (arising
titled as
out of SLP (Civil) No.24933 of 2019), Rishi Pal
Singh versus New India Assurance Co. Ltd & Others,
Relevant paragraphs 3 to 9 of the judgment, are reproduced,
as under:
“3. Before this Court, learned counsel for the
appellant relied upon United India Insurance Co.
Ltd v. Lehru & Ors. as also threeJudge Bench
judgment reported as National Insurance Co. Ltd.
v. Swaran Singh and Others that the owner has
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
51 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
no mean to verify the genuineness of driving
license produced before him, provided that the
owner finds the driver is competent to drive the
vehicle. Hence, once the appellant has deposed
that he had taken test of the driver before
employing him, he has taken sufficient precaution
before employment. Therefore, there could not be
any direction to recover the amount from the
appellant.
4. The record of the Tribunal was
requisitioned. A perusal thereof shows that the
claimants have produced a driving licence of the
driver before the Tribunal. The said driving licence
is available at page 502 of the paper book. The
genuineness of the said licence was investigated
and in the report Ex. R3W2/D, the same was
found to be not issued by the Licensing Authority
Mandi in the State of Himachal Pradesh.
5. Thus, it was the claimant alone who relied
upon the license issued by Licensing Authority
Mandi. The same was not found to be genuine.
The statement of the owner, that the license was
from Nagaland is without any supporting
documents and is thus meaning less. The fact
remains, having appointing driver after taking
test, the appellant was not expected to make
enquiries from the licensing authority as to
whether driving license shown to him is valid or
not.
6. If the owner has stated that driver had
produced the driving license from Nagaland but no
such license was produced on record, it is
obviously a mistake on the part of the owner.
However, such aspect cannot be used to grant
liberty to the Insurance Company to recover the
amount from the owner when the driving license
actually produced by the claimant themselves
was from Una, Himachal Pradesh. It may be
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
52 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
stated that falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus is not
the principle applicable in India. Therefore, even if
a part of the statement that the driver has
produced the license from Nagaland is not correct,
it is wholly inconsequential.
7. To appreciate the contention of the
appellant, the observations of this Court in Lehru
(supra) have been reproduced as under:
"20. When an owner is hiring a driver he will
therefore have to check whether the driver
has a driving licence. If the driver produces a
driving licence which on the face of it looks
genuine, the owner is not expected to find
out whether the licence has in fact been
issued by a competent authority or not. The
owner would then take the test of the driver.
If he finds that the driver is competent to
drive the vehicle, he will hire the driver. We
find it rather strange that insurance
companies expect owners to make enquiries
with RTOS, which are spread all over the
country, whether the driving licence shown
to them is valid or not. Thus where the
owner has satisfied himself that the driver
has a licence and is driving competently
there would be no breach of Section 149(2)(a)
(ii). The insurance company would not then
be absolved of liability. If it ultimately turns
out that the licence was fake, the insurance
company would continue to remain liable
unless they prove that the owner/insured
was aware or had noticed that the licence
was fake and still permitted that person to
drive. More importantly, even in such a case
the insurance company would remain liable
to the innocent third party, but it may be
able to recover from the insured. This is the
law which has been laid down in Skandia
[(1987) 2 SCC 654], Sohan Lal Passı [(1996)
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
53 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
5 SCC 21: 1996 SCC (Cri) 871] and Kamla
[(2001) 4 SCC 342: 2001 SCC (Cri) 701]
cases. We are in full agreement with the
views expressed therein and see no reason
to take a different view."
8. The issue has been examined by a larger
Bench in Swaran Singh (supra) wherein it was
argued that the observations in Lehru were in
conflict with the earlier judgment in New India
Assurance Co. v. Kamla and Ors.. This Court held
as under:
"92. It may be true as has been contended
on behalf of the petitioner that a fake or
forged licence is as good as no licence but
the question herein, as noticed hereinbefore,
is whether the insurer must prove that the
owner was guilty of the wilful breach of the
conditions of the insurance policy or the
contract of insurance. In Lehru case [(2003) 3
SCC 338: 2003 SCC (Cri) 614) the matter
has been considered in some detail. We are
in general agreement with the approach of
the Bench but we intend to point out that the
observations made therein must be
understood to have been made in the light of
the requirements of the law in terms whereof
the insurer is to establish wilful breach on
the part of the insured and not for the
purpose of it's disentitlement from raising
any defence or for the owners to be absolved
from any liability whatsoever. We would be
dealing in some detail with this aspect of the
matter a little later.
xxx xxx xxx
99. So far as the purported conflict in the
judgments of Kamla [(2001) 4 SCC 342:
2001 SCC (Cri) 701] and Lehru [(2003) 3
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
54 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
SCC 338: 2003 SCC (Cri) 614] is concerned,
we may wish to point out that the defence to
the effect that the licence held by the person
driving the vehicle was a fake one, would be
available to the insurance companies, but
whether despite the same, the plea of
default on the part of the owner has been
established or not would be a question
which will have to be determined in each
case.
100. This Court, however, in Lehru [(2003) 3
SCC 338: 2003 SCC (Cri) 614] must not be
read to mean that an owner of a vehicle can
under no circumstances have any duty to
make any enquiry in this respect. The same,
however, would again be a question which
would arise for consideration in each
individual case."
9. Similar question again came up for
consideration before a threeJudge Bench in a
judgment reported as Pappu and Ors. v. Vinod
Kumar Lamba and Anr.5 wherein it was held that
the onus would shift on the Insurance Company
after the owner of the offending vehicle pleads
and proves the basic facts within his knowledge
that the driver of the offending vehicle was
authorized by him to drive the vehicle and was
having a valid driving license at the relevant time.
The valid driving license is the license which is
produced before the owner. This Court held as
under:
"12. This Court in National Insurance Co.
Ltd. [National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Swaran
Singh, (2004) 3 SCC 297: 2004 SCC (Cri)
733] has noticed the defences available to
the insurance company under Section 149(2)
(a)(ii) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The
insurance company is entitled to take a
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
55 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
defence that the offending vehicle was
driven by an unauthorised person or the
person driving the vehicle did not have a
valid driving licence. The onus would shift on
the insurance company only after the owner
of the offending vehicle pleads and proves
the basic facts within his knowledge that the
driver of the offending vehicle was
authorised by him to drive the vehicle and
was having a valid driving licence at the
relevant time.
xxx xxx xxx
17. This issue has been answered in
National Insurance Co. Ltd. [National
Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Swaran Singh, (2004) 3
SCC 297: 2004 SCC (Cri) 733) In that case, it
was contended by the insurance company
that once the defence taken by the insurer is
accepted by the Tribunal, it is bound to
discharge the insurer and fix the liability
only on the owner and/or the driver of the
vehicle. However, this Court held that even if
the insurer succeeds in establishing its
defence, the Tribunal or the court can direct
the insurance company to pay the award
amount to the claimant(s) and, in turn,
recover the same from the owner of the
vehicle. The threeJudge Bench, after
analysing the earlier decisions on the point,
held that there was no reason to deviate
from the said well settled principle. In para
107, the Court then observed thus: (SCC p.
340)
"107. We may, however, hasten to add that
the Tribunal and the court must, however,
exercise their jurisdiction to issue such a
direction upon consideration of the facts and
circumstances of each case and in the event
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
56 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
such a direction has been issued, despite
arriving at a finding of fact to the effect that
the insurer has been able to establish that
the insured has committed a breach of
contract of insurance as envisaged under
subclause (ii) of clause (a) of subsection (2)
of Section 149 of the Act, the insurance
company shall be entitled to realise the
awarded amount from the owner or driver of
the vehicle, as the case may be, in execution
of the same award having regard to the
provisions of Sections 165 and 168 of the
Act. However, in the event, having regard to
the limited scope of inquiry in the
proceedings before the Tribunal it had not
been able to do so, the insurance company
may initiate a separate action therefor
against the owner or the driver of the vehicle
or both, as the case may be. Those
exceptional cases may arise when the
evidence becomes available to or comes to
the notice of the insurer at a subsequent
stage or for one reason or the other, the
insurer was not given an opportunity to
defend at all. Such a course of action may
also be resorted to when a fraud or collusion
between the victim and the owner of the
vehicle is detected or comes to the
knowledge of the insurer at a later stage."
63. Judging the facts and circumstances of the
present case, as well as, the evidence so discussed above,
this Court is of the view that the learned Tribunal has rightly
negated the plea of the Insurance Company to exonerate it
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
57 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
from indemnifying the owner. The said findings do not
require any interference by this Court.
64. In this case, the award has also been assailed on
the ground that there is breach of the terms and conditions
of the insurance policy, as the offending vehicle was
authorized to carry ‘23’ persons, as per copy of registration
certificate Ex.RW1/B and there were more than 44 persons
traveling in the offending vehicle, out of which, 25 persons
died and 19 sustained injuries.
65. It has vehemently been argued by the learned
Senior Counsel appearing for the Insurance Company that
the offending vehicle was overloaded, as such, the Insurance
Company is not liable to pay the amount of compensation,
as respondent No.1 permitted to ply the offending vehicle in
violation of the terms and conditions of the insurance policy.
66. The above submission of the learned Senior
Counsel appearing for the Insurance Company is not liable
to be accepted, as, Hon’ble Supreme Court in a case reported
as,
Lakhmi Chand versus Reliance General Insurance
, , has held that mere
Company Limited (2016) 3 SCC 100
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
58 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
factum of carrying more passengers, than the permitted
seating capacity, in the vehicle, does not amount to
fundamental breach of the terms and conditions of the
insurance policy. Relevant paragraph 14 of the judgment, is
reproduced, as under:
“14. The National Commission upheld the order of
dismissal of the complaint of the appellant
passed by the State Commission. The National
Commission however, did not consider the
judgment of this Court in the case of B.V.
Nagaraju v. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd Divisional
Officer, Hassan, 1996 4 SCC 647. In that case,
the insurance company had taken the defence
that the vehicle in question was carrying more
passengers than the permitted capacity in terms
of the policy at the time of the accident. The said
plea of the insurance company was rejected. This
Court held that the mere factum of carrying more
passengers than the permitted seating capacity in
the goods carrying vehicle by the insured does
not amount to a fundamental breach of the terms
and conditions of the policy so as to allow the
insurer to eschew its liability towards the
damage caused to the vehicle. This Court in the
said case has held as under:
"It is plain from the terms of the Insurance Policy
that the insured vehicle was entitled to carry six
workmen, excluding the driver. If those six
workmen when travelling in the vehicle, are
assumed not to have increased risk from the
point of view of the Insurance Company on
occurring of an accident, how could those added
persons be said to have contributed to the
causing of it is the pose, keeping apart the load it
was carrying.
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
59 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
In the present case the driver of the vehicle was
not responsible for the accident. Merely by lifting
a person or two, or even three, by the driver or
the cleaner of the vehicle, without the knowledge
of the owner, cannot be said to be such a
fundamental breach that the owner should, in all
events, be denied indemnification. The misuse of
the vehicle was somewhat irregular though, but
not so fundamental in nature so as to put an end
to the contract, unless some factors existed which
by themselves, had gone to contribute to the
causing of the accident."
67. Hence, in this case, the learned Tribunal, has
rightly fastened the liability to pay the amount of
compensation upon the Insurance Company, to the extent of
which, the vehicle was authorized to carry passengers, i.e.,
23.
68. Hon’ble Supreme Court in National Insurance
,
Company vs. Anjana Shyam AIR 2007 Supreme Court
2870 , has held that the Insurance Company would be
bound to cover the higher of the awards and will deposit the
higher of the amounts of compensation awarded to the
extent of the number of passengers covered by the insurance
policy. Relevant paras 22 and 23 of the judgment, are
reproduced as under:
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
60 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
“22. Then arises the question, how to determine
the compensation payable or how to quantify
the compensation since there is no means of
ascertaining who out of the overloaded
passengers constitute the passengers covered
by the insurance policy as permitted to be
carried by the permit itself. As this Court has
indicated, the purpose of the Act is to bring
benefit to the third parties who are either
injured or dead in an accident. It serves a social
purpose. Keeping that in mind, we think that the
practical and proper course would be to hold
that the insurance company, in such a case,
would be bound to cover the higher of the
various awards and will be compelled to deposit
the higher of the amounts of compensation
awarded to the extent of the number of
passengers covered by the insurance policy.
23. Illustratively, we may put it like this. In the
case on hand, 42 passengers were the
permitted passengers and they are the ones
who have been insured by the insurance
company. 90 persons have either died or got
injured in the accident. Awards have been
passed for varied sums. The Tribunal should
take into account, the higher of the 42 awards
made, add them up and direct the insurance
company to deposit that lump sum. Thus, the
liability of the insurance company would be to
pay the compensation awarded to 42 out of the
90 passengers. It is to ensure that the maximum
benefit is derived by the insurance taken for the
passengers of the vehicle, that we hold that the
42 awards to be satisfied by the insurance
company would be the 42 awards in the
descending order starting from the highest of the
awards. In other words, the higher of the 42
awards will be taken into account and it would
be the sum total of those higher 42 awards that
would be the amount that the insurance
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
61 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
company would be liable to deposit. It will be for
the Tribunal thereafter to direct distribution of
the money so deposited by the insurance
company proportionately to all the claimants,
here all the 90, and leave all the claimants to
recover the balance from the owner of the
vehicle. In such cases, it will be necessary for
the Tribunal, even at the initial stage, to make
appropriate orders to ensure that the amount
could be recovered from the owner by ordering
attachment or by passing other restrictive orders
against the owner so as to ensure the
satisfaction in full of the awards that may be
passed ultimately.”
(self emphasis supplied)
69. The said view has again been elaborated/
clarified, by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in United India
Insurance Company Limited versus K.M. Poonam and
. Relevant paragraphs 38 to 40,
Others, (2015) 15 SCC 297
of the judgment, are reproduced, as under:
“38. Having arrived at the conclusion that the
liability of the Insurance Company to pay
compensation was limited to six persons travelling
inside the vehicle only and that the liability to pay
the others was that of the owner, we, in this case,
are faced with the same problem as had surfaced in
Anjana Shyam 's case (supra).
39. The number of persons to be compensated
being in excess of the number of persons who could
validly be carried in the vehicle, the question which
arises is one of apportionment of the amounts to be
paid. Since there can be no pick and choose method
to identify the five passengers, excluding the driver,
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
62 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
in respect of whom compensation would be payable
by the Insurance Company, to meet the ends of
justice we may apply the procedure adopted in Baljit
Kaur 's case (supra) and direct that the Insurance
Company should deposit the total amount of
compensation awarded to all the claimants and the
amounts so deposited be disbursed to the claimants
in respect to their claims, with liberty to the
Insurance Company to recover the amounts paid by
it over and above the compensation amounts
payable in respect of the persons covered by the
Insurance Policy from the owner of the vehicle, as
was directed in Baljit Kaur 's case.
40. In other words, the Appellant Insurance
Company shall deposit with the Tribunal the total
amount of the amounts awarded in favour of the
awardees within two months from the date of this
order and the same is to be utilized to satisfy the
claims of those claimants not covered by the
Insurance Policy along with the persons so covered.
The Insurance Company will be entitled to recover
the amounts paid by it, in excess of its liability, from
the owner of the vehicle, by putting the decree into
execution. For the aforesaid purpose, the total
amount of the six Awards which are the highest
shall be construed as the liability of the Insurance
Company. After deducting the said amount from the
total amount of all the Awards deposited in terms of
this order, the Insurance Company will be entitled to
recover the balance amount from the owner of the
vehicle as if it is an amount decreed by the Tribunal
in favour of the Insurance Company. The Insurance
Company will not be required to file a separate suit
in this regard in order to recover the amounts paid in
excess of its liability from the owner of the vehicle.”
(self emphasis supplied)
70. Being guided by the aforesaid decisions, this
Court has no hesitation to hold that the Insurance Company
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
63 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
is liable to satisfy the highest awards, to the extent of 23
passengers, and in rest of the awards, the Insurance
Company shall, at the first instance, pay the compensation
amount along with interest, with a right to recover the same
from the owner of the offending vehicle.
71. As such, the appeals preferred by the Insurance
Company, as well as, by the owner of the offending vehicle,
involved, in the accident, in question, are being disposed of,
in the aforesaid terms.
72. In this case, amount of compensation has also
been sought to be reduced by the insurance company,
whereas, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners
has sought the enhancement of the compensation amount,
so that the same could fall within the definition of ‘just
compensation’.
73. It is no longer res integra that the endeavor of the
Court/Tribunal is to grant the ‘ just compensation’ , as, the
provisions of MV Act are beneficial piece of legislation.
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
64 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
74. In order to achieve the above legislative intent,
now, this Court would proceed further to determine the fact
whether the amount of compensation, which has been
awarded by the learned Tribunal, falls within the definition
of ‘just compensation’ or not.
75. In the present case, the petitioners are wife,
daughters and mother of Shri Piare Lal, who expired in the
accident, in question, having taken place due to the rash
and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle.
76. The learned Tribunal has taken the age of
deceased Piare Lal, as 42 years, on the basis of the
postmortem report Ex.PW3/C. Even, in the Parivar Register
Ex.PW3/D, his year of birth has been mentioned as 1972
and the accident had taken place on 24.09.2014. Meaning
thereby, he was about 42 years at the time of his death.
77. The learned Tribunal has taken the earnings of
Shri Piare Lal during his lifetime as Rs.7,000/ per month.
In the absence of any documentary evidence, the approach
of the learned Tribunal to assess the earnings on a notional
basis is not sustainable in the eyes of law. The ends of
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
65 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
justice would be met if the earnings of Shri Piare Lal are
taken as Rs.6,000/ per month, by applying the principle
that the person working under the MNREGA scheme would
be getting Rs. 200/ per day (Rs.6,000/ per month).
78. The learned Tribunal has given 30% increase, in
the earnings of Shri Piare Lal, on account of future
prospects. The said findings are also not sustainable in the
eyes of law, as the Hon’ble Supreme Court, in
National
Insurance Co. Ltd. versus Pranay Sethi, (2017) 16 SCC
680 , has held as under:
59. In view of the aforesaid analysis, we proceed
to record our conclusions:
(i) The twoJudge 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
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
66 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
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 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.
(v) For determination of the multiplicand, the
deduction for personal and living expenses, the
tribunals and the courts shall be guided by
paragraphs 30 to 32 of Sarla Verma which we
have reproduced hereinbefore.
(vi) The selection of multiplier shall be as
indicated in the Table in Sarla Verma read with
paragraph 42 of that judgment.
(vii) The age of the deceased should be the basis
for applying the multiplier.
(viii) Reasonable figures on conventional heads,
namely, loss of estate, loss of consortium and
funeral expenses should be Rs. 15,000/, Rs.
40,000/ and Rs. 15,000/ respectively. The
aforesaid amounts should be enhanced at the
rate of 10% in every three years.
60. The reference is answered accordingly.
Matters be placed before the appropriate Bench.
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
67 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
79. Admittedly, Piare Lal was working in unorganized
sector and his age, at the time of accident was 42 years, as
such, in view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme
Court in Pranay Sethi’s case supra, 25% increase is
required to be given, towards future prospects. Thus, by
adding 25%, his monthly income comes to Rs.7,500/
(Rs.6,000/ + Rs.1,500/).
80. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in
Sarla Verma
(Smt) and others versus Delhi Transport Corporation
and another, (2009) 6 Supreme Court Cases 121 , has
mandated that out of the total amount of the earnings of the
deceased, some amount is required to be deducted, had the
person, whose LRs have approached the Court for
compensation, been alive. Relevant paragraphs 30 and 31 of
the judgment, are reproduced, as under:
30. Though in some cases the deduction to be
made towards personal and living expenses is
calculated on the basis of units indicated in Trilok
Chandra, the general practice is to apply
standardized deductions. Having considered
several subsequent decisions of this court, we are
of the view that where the deceased was married,
the deduction towards personal and living
expenses of the deceased, should be onethird
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
68 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
(1/3rd) where the number of dependent family
members is 2 to 3, onefourth (1/4th) where the
number of dependent family members is 4 to 6,
and onefifth (1/5th) where the number of
dependent family members exceed six.
31. Where the deceased was a bachelor and the
claimants are the parents, the deduction follows a
different principle. In regard to bachelors,
normally, 50% is deducted as personal and living
expenses, because it is assumed that a bachelor
would tend to spend more on himself. Even
otherwise, there is also the possibility of his
getting married in a short time, in which event the
contribution to the parent/s and siblings is likely
to be cut drastically. Further, subject to evidence
to the contrary, the father is likely to have his
own income and will not be considered as a
dependant and the mother alone will be
considered as a dependent. In the absence of
evidence to the contrary, brothers and sisters will
not be considered as dependents, because they
will either be independent and earning, or
married, or be dependant on the father.
81. As such, keeping in view the number of
th
dependents, 1/4 amount, on account of his personal
expenses, is required to be deducted, had he been alive.
Thus, his monthly income comes to Rs.5,625/ (Rs.7,500/
minus Rs.1,875/).
82. Learned Tribunal has applied the multiplier of
‘14’, which is the appropriate multiplier. Thus, the loss of
contribution comes to Rs.5,625/x12 x 14 = Rs.9,45,000/.
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
69 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
83. The learned Tribunal has awarded a sum of
Rs.1,00,000/ on account of loss of consortium, and
Rs.25,000/ towards ‘funeral charges’. The said findings, as
per the mandate of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Pranay
’s case supra, require interference by this Court. The
Sethi
petitioners are held entitled to Rs.15,000/, under the head
‘loss of estate’, Rs.40,000/, under the head ‘loss of
consortium’ and Rs.15,000/, under the head ‘funeral
expenses’.
84. However, Hon’ble Supreme Court in
Magma
General Insurance Company Limited versus Nanu Ram
@ Chuhru Ram and others, (2018) 18 SCC 130 , has
mandated that each claimant is entitled to the amount of
compensation under the head ‘loss of consortium’. Relevant
paragraphs 21 to 24 of the judgment, are reproduced, as
under:
“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
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
70 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
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 husband
wife which allows compensation to the surviving
spouse for loss of "company, society, coperation,
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 compensation for
loss of the love, affection, care and
companionship of the deceased child.
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
71 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
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.
85. Thus, the entitlement of the petitioners, is
adjudicated, as under:
1. Loss of income = Rs. 9,45,000/
2. Loss of consortium = Rs.1,60,000/
(Rs.40,000 x 4)
3. Loss of estate = Rs.15,000/
4. Funeral Expenses = Rs.15,000/
________________________________________________________
Total = Rs.11,35,000/.
________________________________________________________
86. So far as the rate of interest is concerned, the
said findings do not require any interference by this Court.
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
72 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
87. Consequently, the present appeal is partly
allowed. The awarded amount is reduced from
Rs.12,71,600/ to Rs.11,35,000/, with interest @ 7.5% per
annum. The award passed by the learned Tribunal is
modified accordingly.
FAO No. 549 of 2016
88. This appeal has been preferred by the Insurance
Company against the award dated 29.07.2016 passed by the
learned Tribunal, in Claim Petition No. 46/2 of 2014, titled
as ‘Savitri Devi & Another versus Meena Kumari & Others’,
whereby, a sum of Rs.11,97,500/, along with interest, at
the rate of 7.5% per annum, has been awarded to the
petitionersclaimants, from the date of filing of the petition,
till the realization thereof. The ultimate liability to pay the
amount of compensation has been fastened upon the
Insurance Company.
89. The said claim petition has been filed by the
petitioners being, mother and brother of Chaman Lal, son of
Daulat Ram, who, as per the claim petition, expired on
24.9.2014, in the accident, in question.
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
73 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
90. According to the petitioners, Chaman Lal was a
motorelectric mechanic, agriculturist and horticulturist by
profession. As such, he was earning Rs.20,000/ per
month.
91. Petitioner No.1, when appeared in the witness
box as PW4 also deposed so. She has proved the salary
certificate of her son as Ex.PW4/B, death certificate Ex.PW
4/C, matriculation certificate Ex.PW4/D, computer course
certificates Ex.PW4/E and Ex. PW4/F.
92. By examining PW6, the petitioners have proved
that Shri Chaman Lal was working with PW6 Kulwant Singh,
who is Proprietor of Power and Controls Company.
₹
According to him, he used to pay 7,500/ per month to
Chaman Lal and proved the certificate Ex. PW4/B.
93. The learned Tribunal has taken the age of Shri
Chaman Lal, at the time of his death, as 26 years, on the
basis of copy of matriculation certificate, in which, his date
of birth has been mentioned as 07.09.1988. As such, the
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
74 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
said findings, which are based upon documentary evidence,
do not require any interference, by this Court.
94. So far as the income of Shri Chaman Lal is
concerned, from the evidence of PW6, this Court has no
hesitation to hold that the monthly income of Shri Chaman
Lal was Rs.7,500/ per month. The said findings do not
require any interference by this Court. However, the learned
Tribunal has not given the increase, as per the mandate of
Hon’ble Supreme Court, in Pranay Sethi ’s case supra and
has given the addition, towards future prospect @ 50%, after
deducting the amount towards his personal expenses.
95. Admittedly, Chaman Lal was working in
unorganized sector and his age, at the time of the accident
was below 40 years, as such, in view of the law laid down by
the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Pranay Sethi ’s case supra,
40% increase is required to be given, towards future
prospects, had he been alive. Thus, by adding 40%, his
monthly income comes to Rs.10,500/ (Rs.7,500/ +
Rs.3,000/).
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
75 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
96. Out of the said amount, in view of the law laid
down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Sarla Verma’s case
supra, and keeping in view the fact that the deceased was
bachelor, 50% amount, on account of his personal expenses,
is required to be deducted, had he been alive. Thus, his
monthly income comes to Rs.5,250/ (Rs.10,500/ minus
Rs.5,250/).
97. Learned Tribunal has applied the multiplier of
‘17’, which is the appropriate multiplier. Thus, the loss of
contribution comes to Rs.5,250/x12 x17 = Rs.10,71,000/.
98. The learned Tribunal has awarded a sum of
Rs.25,000/ on account of funeral charges and Rs.25,000/
on account of love and affection. The said findings, as per
the mandate of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Pranay
’s case supra, require interference by this Court. The
Sethi
petitioners are held entitled to Rs.15,000/ under the head
‘loss of estate’, Rs.40,000/ under the head ‘loss of
consortium’ and Rs.15,000/ under the head ‘funeral
expenses.
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
76 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
99. In view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble
Supreme Court in Nanu Ram ’s case supra, each claimant is
entitled to the amount of compensation under the head ‘loss
of consortium’.
100. Thus, the entitlement of the petitioners, is
adjudicated, as under:
1. Loss of income = Rs. 10,71,000/
2. Loss of consortium = Rs. 80,000/
(Rs.40,000/ x 2)
3. Loss of estate = Rs.15,000/
4. Funeral Expenses = Rs.15,000/
________________________________________________________
Total = Rs.11,81,000/.
________________________________________________________
101. So far as the rate of interest is concerned, the
said findings do not require any interference by this Court.
102. Consequently, the present appeal is partly
allowed and the awarded amount is reduced from
Rs.11,97,500/ to Rs.11,81,000/, with interest @ 7.5% per
annum. The award passed by the learned MACT is modified
accordingly.
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
77 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
FAO No.550 of 2016
103. The instant appeal has been preferred by the
Insurance Company against the award dated 29.07.2016,
passed by the learned Tribunal, in Claim Petition No. 36/2
of 2014, titled as ‘Satya Devi & Another versus Meena
Kumari & Others’, whereby, a sum of Rs.12,02,000/, along
with interest, at the rate of 7.5% per annum, has been
awarded to the petitionersclaimants, from the date of filing
of the petition, till the date of deposit of the amount. The
ultimate liability to pay the amount of compensation has
been fastened upon the Insurance Company.
104. The petitionersclaimants, being parents of
Satish Kumar, who expired, in the accident in question,
involving the offending vehicle, have filed the above noted
petition, before the learned Tribunal, seeking compensation
of Rs.30,00,000/.
105. As per the claimants, Shri Satish Kumar had
sustained fatal injuries, in the accident, in question, and at
the time of death, his age has been pleaded to be 28 years.
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
78 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
According to the claimants, he was working in a private firm
and earning Rs.30,000/ per month, from all sources.
106. Petitioners have examined Lalit Kumar Gupta,
proprietor of M/s Pappu Product, 56 Industrial Area,
Bilaspur, as PW5, who has deposed that Satish Kumar was
working with him as foreman and he used to pay him
Rs.8,000/ as salary. In this regard, he has proved the
certificate Ex.PW5/A. According to him, Satish Kumar, also
used to earn Rs.4,000/ to Rs.5,000/, in addition to this.
107. Learned Tribunal has taken the age of Shri
Satish Kumar, as 33 years, on the basis of middle standard
examination certificate Ex.PW4/D. The said findings, being
based upon the documentary evidence, require no
interference by this Court.
108. Learned Tribunal has taken the earnings of Shri
Satish Kumar as Rs.8,000/ per month, on the basis of the
certificate Ex.PW5/A, as the oral evidence, qua the
additional income of the deceased, during his life time, was
not supported by any documentary evidence. As such, the
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
79 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
said findings are not required to be interfered with, by this
Court.
109. Learned Tribunal has wrongly given the addition
of 50%, which is not sustainable in the eyes of law, in view
of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court, in Pranay Sethi ’s
case supra.
110. Admittedly, Shri Satish Kumar was working in
unorganized sector and his age is below 40 years, as such,
in view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court
in ’s case supra, 40% increase is required to
Pranay Sethi
be given, towards future prospects, had he been alive. Thus,
by adding 40% of his monthly income, the same comes to
Rs.11,200/ (Rs.8,000/ + Rs.3,200/).
111. Out of the said amount, in view of the law laid
down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case
Sarla Verma’s
supra, and keeping in view the fact that he was bachelor,
50% amount, on account of his personal expenses, is
required to be deducted, had he been alive. Thus, his
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
80 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
monthly income comes to Rs.5,600/ (Rs.11,200/ minus
Rs.5,600/).
112. Learned Tribunal has applied the multiplier of
‘16’, which is the appropriate multiplier to be applied, in the
present case. Thus, the loss of contribution comes to
Rs.5,600/x12 x 16 = Rs.10,75,200/.
113. The learned Tribunal has awarded a sum of
Rs.25,000/ on account of funeral expenses and
Rs.25,000/, on account of love and affection. The said
findings, as per the mandate of the Hon’ble Supreme Court
in ’s case supra, require interference by this
Pranay Sethi
Court. The petitioners are held entitled to Rs.15,000/
under the head ‘loss of estate’, Rs.40,000/ under the head
‘loss of consortium’ and Rs.15,000/ under the head ‘funeral
expenses’.
114. In view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble
Supreme Court in Nanu Ram’ s case supra , each claimant is
entitled to the amount of compensation under the head ‘loss
of consortium’.
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
81 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
115. Thus, the entitlement of the petitioners, is
adjudicated, as under:
1. Loss of income = Rs. 10,75,200/
2. Loss of consortium = Rs.80,000/
(Rs.40,000 x 2)
3. Loss of estate = Rs.15,000/
4. Funeral Expenses = Rs.15,000/
________________________________________________________
Total = Rs.11,85,200/.
________________________________________________________
116. So far as the rate of interest is concerned, the
said findings do not require any interference by this Court.
117. Consequently, the present appeal is partly
allowed, and the awarded amount is reduced from
Rs.12,02,000/ to Rs.11,85,200/, with interest @ 7.5% per
annum. The award passed by the learned Tribunal is
modified accordingly.
FAO (MV) No.551 of 2016
118. The instant appeal has been preferred by the
Insurance Company against the award dated 01.09.2016,
passed by the learned Tribunal, in Claim Petition No. 4/2 of
2015, titled as ‘Kaushalya Devi & Another versus Meena
Kumari & Others’, whereby, a sum of Rs.5,73,056/, along
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
82 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
with interest, at the rate of 7.5% per annum, has been
awarded to the petitionersclaimants, from the date of filing
of the petition, till the date of deposit of the amount. The
ultimate liability to pay the amount of compensation has
been fastened upon the Insurance Company.
119. The petitionersclaimants, being widow and son
of Inder Dev, who expired, in the accident, in question,
involving the offending vehicle, have filed the above noted
petition, before the learned Tribunal, seeking compensation
of Rs.20,00,000/.
120. As per the claimants, Shri Inder Dev had
sustained fatal injuries, in the accident, in question, and at
the time of death, his age has been pleaded to be 62 years of
age. According to the claimants, he was working as clerk
with R.L. Pathak and Shri O.P. Gautam, Advocates and
earning Rs.20,000/ per month, from all sources.
121. In order to prove the earnings of Shri Inder Dev,
petitioners have examined Shri R.L. Pathak, Advocate, who
has deposed that he used to pay Rs.7,000/ per month to
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
83 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
Shri Inder Dev. PW4 Shri O.P. Gautam, Advocate has also
deposed that Inder Dev, was working with him, as well as,
with Mr. R.L. Pathak, Advocate and PW4 used to pay him
Rs.5,000/ per month.
122. Learned Tribunal has taken the age of Shri Inder
Dev, as 62 years, on the basis of postmortem report Ex.PW
2/A. The said findings, being based upon the documentary
evidence, require no interference by this Court.
123. Learned Tribunal has taken the earnings of Shri
Inder Dev, as Rs.8,000/ per month. The said findings are
not required to be interfered with, by this Court. Keeping in
view the age of the deceased, no addition is required to be
given towards future prospects.
124. Out of the said amount, in view of the law laid
down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case
Sarla Verma’s
rd
supra, and keeping in view the number of dependents, 1/3
amount, on account of his personal expenses, is required to
be deducted, had he been alive. Thus, his monthly income
comes to Rs.5,334/ (Rs.8,000/ minus Rs.2,666/).
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
84 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
125. Learned Tribunal has applied the multiplier of ‘7’,
which is the appropriate multiplier to be applied, in the
present case. Thus, the loss of contribution comes to
Rs.5,334/x12 x 7 = Rs.4,48,056/.
126. The learned Tribunal has awarded a sum of
Rs.25,000/ on account of funeral expenses and
Rs.1,00,000/, on account of consortium. The said findings,
as per the mandate of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in
Pranay
Sethi ’s case supra, require interference by this Court. The
petitioners are held entitled to Rs.15,000/ under the head
‘loss of estate’, Rs.40,000/ under the head ‘loss of
consortium’ and Rs.15,000/ under the head ‘funeral
expenses’.
127. In view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble
Supreme Court in s case supra , each claimant is
Nanu Ram’
entitled to the amount of compensation under the head ‘loss
of consortium’.
128. Thus, the entitlement of the petitioners, is
adjudicated, as under:
1. Loss of income = Rs.4,48,056/
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
85 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
2. Loss of consortium = Rs.80,000/
(Rs.40,000 x 2)
3. Loss of estate = Rs.15,000/
4. Funeral Expenses = Rs.15,000/
________________________________________________________
Total = Rs.5,58,056/.
________________________________________________________
129. So far as the rate of interest is concerned, the
said findings do not require any interference by this Court.
130. Consequently, the present appeal is partly
allowed, and the awarded amount is reduced from
Rs.5,73,056/ to Rs.5,58,056/, with interest @ 7.5% per
annum. The award passed by the learned Tribunal is
modified accordingly.
FAO (MV) No.552 of 2016
131. The instant appeal has been preferred by the
Insurance Company against the award dated 01.08.2016,
passed by the learned Tribunal, in Claim Petition No. 40/2
of 2014, titled as ‘Sheetla & Another versus Meena Kumari &
Others’, whereby, a sum of Rs.10,22,000/, along with
interest, at the rate of 7.5% per annum, has been awarded to
the petitionersclaimants, from the date of filing of the
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
86 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
petition, till the date of deposit of the amount. The ultimate
liability to pay the amount of compensation has been
fastened upon the Insurance Company.
132. The petitionersclaimants, being parents of
Karan, who expired, in the accident in question, involving
the offending vehicle, have filed the above noted petition,
before the learned Tribunal, seeking compensation of
Rs.20,00,000/.
133. As per the claimants, Shri Karan had sustained
fatal injuries, in the accident, in question, and at the time of
death, his age has been pleaded to be 16 years. According to
the claimants, he was studying in a private School at
Kandraur in +2 Class and his monthly income has been
pleaded as Rs.10,000/, from all sources.
134. Learned Tribunal has taken the age of Shri
Karan, as 16 years, on the basis of matriculation
examination certificate Ex.PW4/C. The said findings, being
based upon the documentary evidence, require no
interference by this Court.
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
87 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
135. Learned Tribunal has taken the earnings of Shri
Karan, as Rs.6,000/ per month and the learned Tribunal
has deducted 50% of the amount of compensation. The said
findings are not sustainable in the eyes of law and require
an interference, by this Court. Keeping in view the peculiar
facts and circumstances of the present case, it would be just
and appropriate for this Court to take the notional income of
Shri Karan as Rs.40,000/ per annum.
136. Learned Tribunal has applied the multiplier of
‘18’, which is the appropriate multiplier to be applied, in the
present case. Thus, the loss of contribution comes to
Rs.40,000 x 18 = Rs.7,20,000/.
137. The learned Tribunal has awarded a sum of
Rs.25,000/ on account of funeral expenses and
Rs.25,000/, on account of love and affection. The said
findings, as per the mandate of the Hon’ble Supreme Court
in Pranay Sethi ’s case supra, require interference by this
Court. The petitioners are held entitled to Rs.15,000/
under the head ‘loss of estate’, Rs.40,000/ under the head
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
88 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
‘loss of consortium’ and Rs.15,000/ under the head ‘funeral
expenses’.
138. In view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble
Supreme Court in Nanu Ram’ s case supra , each claimant is
entitled to the amount of compensation under the head ‘loss
of consortium’.
139. Thus, the entitlement of the petitioners, is
adjudicated, as under:
1. Loss of income = Rs.7,20,000/
2. Loss of consortium = Rs.80,000/
(Rs.40,000 x 2)
3. Loss of estate = Rs.15,000/
4. Funeral Expenses = Rs.15,000/
________________________________________________________
Total = Rs.8,30,000/.
________________________________________________________
140. So far as the rate of interest is concerned, the
said findings do not require any interference by this Court.
141. Consequently, the present appeal is partly
allowed, and the awarded amount is reduced from
Rs.10,22,000/ to Rs.8,30,000/, with interest @ 7.5% per
annum. The award passed by the learned Tribunal is
modified accordingly.
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
89 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
FAO (MV) No.553 of 2016
142. The instant appeal has been preferred by the
Insurance Company against the award dated 01.08.2016,
passed by the learned Tribunal, in Claim Petition No. 39/2
of 2014, titled as ‘Manjeet Kaur & Another versus Meena
Kumari & Others’, whereby, a sum of Rs.14,27,000/, along
with interest, at the rate of 7.5% per annum, has been
awarded to the petitionersclaimants, from the date of filing
of the petition, till the date of deposit of the amount. The
ultimate liability to pay the amount of compensation has
been fastened upon the Insurance Company.
143. The petitionersclaimants, being parents of
Amarjeet, who expired, in the accident, in question, involving
the offending vehicle, have filed the above noted petition,
before the learned Tribunal, seeking compensation of
Rs.30,00,000/.
144. As per the claimants, Shri Amarjeet had
sustained fatal injuries, in the accident, in question, and at
the time of death, his age has been pleaded to be 28 years.
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
90 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
According to the claimants, he was Post Graduate in
(Political Science) and at the time of his death was pursuing
B.Ed., from Gurukul Bharti Chakli. His income has been
pleaded Rs.30,000/ per month, from agriculture, Tuition
work and other sources.
145. Learned Tribunal has taken the age of Shri
Amarjeet, as 28 years, on the basis of matriculation
examination certificate Ex.PW4/C. The said findings, being
based upon the documentary evidence, require no
interference by this Court.
146. Learned Tribunal has taken the earnings of Shri
Amarjeet, as Rs.9,000/ per month. This has been done by
the learned Tribunal, on the basis of the statement of
petitioner No.1, however, petitioner No.1, could not
substantiate the income as Rs.30,000/, on the basis of
some documentary evidence. As such, the learned Tribunal
has rightly taken the income of Shri Amarjeet Singh, as
Rs.9,000/ per month. The said findings are not required to
be interfered with, by this Court. However, the learned
Tribunal has given 50% increase, upon the said amount,
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
91 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
towards future prospects. The said findings require
interference by this Court, as per the mandate of Hon’ble
Supreme Court, in ’s case supra.
Pranay Sethi
147. Admittedly, Amarjeet was working in unorganized
sector and his age is below 40 years, as such, in view of the
law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Pranay
’s case supra, 40% increase is required to be given,
Sethi
towards future prospects. Thus, by adding 40% of his
monthly income, the same comes to Rs.12,600/ (Rs.9,000/
+ Rs.3,600/).
148. Out of the said amount, in view of the law laid
down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case
Sarla Verma’s
supra, and keeping in view the fact that the deceased was
bachelor, 50% amount, on account of his personal expenses,
is required to be deducted, had he been alive. Thus, his
monthly income comes to Rs.6,300/ (Rs.12,600/ minus
Rs.6,300/).
149. Learned Tribunal has applied the multiplier of
‘17’, which is the appropriate multiplier to be applied, in the
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
92 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
present case. Thus, the loss of contribution comes to
Rs.6,300/x12 x 17 = Rs.12,85,200/.
150. The learned Tribunal has awarded a sum of
Rs.25,000/ on account of funeral expenses and
Rs.25,000/, on account of love and affection. The said
findings, as per the mandate of the Hon’ble Supreme Court
in Pranay Sethi ’s case supra, require interference by this
Court. The petitioners are held entitled to Rs.15,000/
under the head ‘loss of estate’, Rs.40,000/ under the head
‘loss of consortium’ and Rs.15,000/ under the head ‘funeral
expenses’.
151. In view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble
Supreme Court in s case supra , each claimant is
Nanu Ram’
entitled to the amount of compensation under the head ‘loss
of consortium’.
152. Thus, the entitlement of the petitioners, is
adjudicated, as under:
1. Loss of income = Rs. 12,85,200/
2. Loss of consortium = Rs.80,000/
(Rs.40,000 x 2)
3. Loss of estate = Rs.15,000/
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
93 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
4. Funeral Expenses = Rs.15,000/
________________________________________________________
Total = Rs.13,95,200/.
________________________________________________________
153. So far as the rate of interest is concerned, the
said findings do not require any interference by this Court.
154. Consequently, the present appeal is partly
allowed, and the awarded amount is reduced from
Rs.14,27,000/ to Rs.13,95,200/, with interest @ 7.5% per
annum. The award passed by the learned Tribunal is
modified accordingly.
FAO (MV) No.554 of 2016
156. The instant appeal has been preferred by the
Insurance Company against the award dated 01.08.2016,
passed by the learned Tribunal, in Claim Petition No. 45/2
of 2014, titled as ‘Saroj Kumari & Another versus Meena
Kumari & Others’, whereby, a sum of Rs.11,21,000/, along
with interest, at the rate of 7.5% per annum, has been
awarded to the petitionersclaimants, from the date of filing
of the petition, till the date of deposit of the amount. The
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
94 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
ultimate liability to pay the amount of compensation has
been fastened upon the Insurance Company.
157. The petitionersclaimants, being parents of
Shashi Pal, who expired, in the accident, in question,
involving the offending vehicle, have filed the above noted
petition, before the learned Tribunal, seeking compensation
of Rs.1,00,00,000/.
158. As per the claimants, Shri Shashi Pal had
sustained fatal injuries, in the accident, in question, and at
the time of death, his age has been pleaded to be 22 years.
According to the claimants, he was pursuing B.Ed., from
Shiva College of Education, Ghumarwin. Apart from this, he
was agriculturist and Horticulturist and tutor. His income
has been pleaded Rs.20,000/ per month, from all sources.
159. Learned Tribunal has taken the age of Shri
Shashi Pal, as 22 years, on the basis of matriculation
examination certificate Ex.PW4/E. The said findings, being
based upon the documentary evidence, require no
interference by this Court.
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
95 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
160. Learned Tribunal has taken the earnings of Shri
Shashi Pal, as Rs.7,000/ per month. The said amount is
liable to be enhanced as a young man of 22 years, who was
pursuing his studies might be helping his parents. As such,
keeping in view the peculiar facts and circumstances of the
present case, the earnings of Shri Shashi Pal can be said to
be Rs.9,000/ per month. The learned Tribunal has given
50% increase, towards future prospects. The said findings
require interference by this Court, as per the mandate of
Hon’ble Supreme Court, in Pranay Sethi ’s case supra.
161. Admittedly, Shashi Pal was working in
unorganized sector and his age is below 40 years, as such,
in view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court
in ’s case supra, 40% increase is required to
Pranay Sethi
be given, towards future prospects. Thus, by adding 40% of
his monthly income, the same comes to Rs.12,600/
(Rs.9,000/ + Rs.3,600/).
162. Out of the said amount, in view of the law laid
down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case
Sarla Verma’s
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
96 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
supra, and keeping in view the fact that the deceased was
bachelor, 50% amount, on account of his personal expenses,
is required to be deducted, had he been alive. Thus, his
monthly income comes to Rs.6,300/ (Rs.12,600/ minus
Rs.6,300/).
163. Learned Tribunal has applied the multiplier of
‘17’. The said findings are also required to be interfered
with, as keeping in view the age of Shashi Pal, the
appropriate multiplier to be applied, in the present case is
‘18’. Thus, the loss of contribution comes to Rs.6,300/x12
x 18 = Rs.13,60,800/.
164. The learned Tribunal has awarded a sum of
Rs.25,000/ on account of funeral expenses and
Rs.25,000/, on account of love and affection. The said
findings, as per the mandate of the Hon’ble Supreme Court
in Pranay Sethi ’s case supra, require interference by this
Court. The petitioners are held entitled to Rs.15,000/
under the head ‘loss of estate’, Rs.40,000/ under the head
‘loss of consortium’ and Rs.15,000/ under the head ‘funeral
expenses’.
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
97 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
165. In view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble
Supreme Court in Nanu Ram’ s case supra , each claimant is
entitled to the amount of compensation under the head ‘loss
of consortium’.
166. Thus, the entitlement of the petitioners, is
adjudicated, as under:
1. Loss of income = Rs.13,60,800/
2. Loss of consortium = Rs.80,000/
(Rs.40,000 x 2)
3. Loss of estate = Rs.15,000/
4. Funeral Expenses = Rs.15,000/
________________________________________________________
Total = Rs.14,70,800/.
________________________________________________________
167. So far as the rate of interest is concerned, the
said findings do not require any interference by this Court.
168. Consequently, the present appeal is disposed of,
and the awarded amount is enhanced from Rs.11,21,000/
to Rs.14,70,800/, with interest @ 7.5% per annum. The
award passed by the learned Tribunal is modified
accordingly.
FAO (MV) No.555 of 2016
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
98 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
169. The instant appeal has been preferred by the
Insurance Company against the award dated 01.09.2016,
passed by the learned Tribunal, in Claim Petition No. 37/2
of 2014, titled as ‘Beena Devi & Another versus Meena
Kumari & Others’, whereby, a sum of Rs.10,22,000/, along
with interest, at the rate of 7.5% per annum, has been
awarded to the petitionersclaimants, from the date of filing
of the petition, till the date of deposit of the amount. The
ultimate liability to pay the amount of compensation has
been fastened upon the Insurance Company.
170. The petitionersclaimants, being parents of
Nitesh Gautam, who expired, in the accident, in question,
involving the offending vehicle, have filed the above noted
petition, before the learned Tribunal, seeking compensation
of Rs.20,00,000/.
171. As per the claimants, Shri Nitesh Gautam had
sustained fatal injuries, in the accident, in question, and at
the time of death, his age has been pleaded to be 19 years.
According to the claimants, he has done his 10+2 and was
pursuing Diploma in Electric Trade from ITI. In addition to
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
99 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
this, he used to assist electrician in his contract work and
was earning Rs.5,000/. His earning has been pleaded
Rs.20,000/, per month, from all sources.
172. Learned Tribunal has taken the age of Shri
Nitesh Gautam, as 19 years. The said findings, being based
upon the documentary evidence, require no interference by
this Court.
173. Learned Tribunal has taken the earnings of Shri
Nitesh Gautam, as Rs.6,000/, per month. The said findings
require interference, as a young man, who was pursuing ITI
Diploma in Electric Trade and working as helper with a
contractor, who used to pay him Rs.5,000/, as such, he
might be contributing Rs.7,000/, per month to his family.
174. The learned Tribunal has given 50% increase,
towards future prospects. The said findings require
interference by this Court, as per the mandate of Hon’ble
Supreme Court, in Pranay Sethi ’s case supra.
175. Admittedly, Nitesh Gautam was working in
unorganized sector and his age is below 40 years, as such,
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
100 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
in view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court
in Pranay Sethi ’s case supra, 40% increase is required to
be given, towards future prospects. Thus, by adding 40% of
his monthly income, the same comes to Rs.9,800/
(Rs.7,000/ + Rs.2,800/).
176. Out of the said amount, in view of the law laid
down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case
Sarla Verma’s
supra, and keeping in view the fact that the deceased was
bachelor, 50% amount, on account of his personal expenses,
is required to be deducted, had he been alive. Thus, his
monthly income comes to Rs.4,900/ (Rs.9,800/ minus
Rs.4,900/).
177. Learned Tribunal has applied the multiplier of
‘18’, which is the appropriate multiplier to be applied, in the
present case. Thus, the loss of contribution comes to
Rs.4,900/x12 x 18 = Rs.10,58,400/.
178. The learned Tribunal has awarded a sum of
Rs.25,000/ on account of funeral expenses and
Rs.25,000/, on account of love and affection. The said
findings, as per the mandate of the Hon’ble Supreme Court
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
101 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
in ’s case supra, require interference by this
Pranay Sethi
Court. The petitioners are held entitled to Rs.15,000/
under the head ‘loss of estate’, Rs.40,000/ under the head
‘loss of consortium’ and Rs.15,000/ under the head ‘funeral
expenses’.
179. In view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble
Supreme Court in Nanu Ram’ s case supra , each claimant is
entitled to the amount of compensation under the head ‘loss
of consortium’.
180. Thus, the entitlement of the petitioners, is
adjudicated, as under:
1. Loss of income = Rs.10,58,400/
2. Loss of consortium = Rs.80,000/
(Rs.40,000 x 2)
3. Loss of estate = Rs.15,000/
4. Funeral Expenses = Rs.15,000/
________________________________________________________
Total = Rs.11,68,400/.
________________________________________________________
181. So far as the rate of interest is concerned, the
said findings do not require any interference by this Court.
182. Consequently, the present appeal is disposed of,
and the awarded amount is enhanced from Rs.10,22,000/
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
102 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
to Rs.11,68,400/, with interest @ 7.5% per annum. The
award passed by the learned Tribunal is modified
accordingly.
FAO (MV) No.556 of 2016
183. The instant appeal has been preferred by the
Insurance Company against the award dated 01.09.2016,
passed by the learned Tribunal, in Claim Petition No.03/2 of
2015, titled as ‘Veena Devi & Others versus Meena Kumari &
Others’, whereby, a sum of Rs.12,06,548/, along with
interest, at the rate of 7.5% per annum, has been awarded to
the petitionersclaimants, from the date of filing of the
petition, till the date of deposit of the amount. The ultimate
liability to pay the amount of compensation has been
fastened upon the Insurance Company.
184. The petitionersclaimants, being widow, sons and
mother of Madan Lal, who expired, in the accident, in
question, involving the offending vehicle, have filed the above
noted petition, before the learned Tribunal, seeking
compensation of Rs.30,00,000/.
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
103 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
185. As per the claimants, Shri Madan Lal had
sustained fatal injuries, in the accident, in question, and at
the time of death, his age has been pleaded to be 51 years.
According to the claimants, he was self employed and was
earning Rs.25,000/ per month, from all sources.
186. In order to prove the said fact, petitioner No.1,
appeared in the witnessbox as PW4 and filed her affidavit,
in which, she had deposed that her husband was earning
Rs.30,000/ per month from tailoring work and Rs.5,000/
per month from agricultural pursuits. In addition to this,
they have examined one Naresh Kumar as PW5, who was
working as assistant. He has also deposed that apart from
him, two other persons were employed by Madan Lal.
187. Learned Tribunal has taken the age of Shri
Madan Lal, as 48 years, on the basis of copy of Parivar
Register Ex.P1. The said findings, being based upon the
documentary evidence, require no interference by this Court.
188. Learned Tribunal has taken the earnings of Shri
Madan Lal, as Rs.8,000/ per month. The said findings are
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
104 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
not required to be interfered with, by this Court. However,
the learned Tribunal has given 30% increase, upon the said
amount, towards future prospects. The said findings require
interference by this Court, as per the mandate of Hon’ble
Supreme Court, in ’s case supra.
Pranay Sethi
189. Admittedly, Madan Lal was working in
unorganized sector and his age has been proved to be 48
years, as such, in view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble
Supreme Court in Pranay Sethi ’s case supra, 25% increase
is required to be given, towards future prospects. Thus, by
adding 25% of his monthly income, the same comes to
Rs.10,000/ (Rs.8,000/ + Rs.2,000/).
190. Out of the said amount, in view of the law laid
down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Sarla Verma’s case
rd
supra, and keeping in view the number of dependents, 1/3
amount, on account of his personal expenses, is required to
be deducted, had he been alive. Thus, his monthly income
comes to Rs.6,667/ (Rs.10,000/ minus Rs.3,333/).
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
105 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
191. Learned Tribunal has applied the multiplier of
‘13’, which is the appropriate multiplier to be applied, in the
present case. Thus, the loss of contribution comes to
Rs.6,667/x12 x 13 = Rs.10,40,052/.
192. The learned Tribunal has awarded a sum of
Rs.25,000/ on account of funeral expenses and
Rs.1,00,000/, on account of consortium. The said findings,
as per the mandate of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in
Pranay
Sethi ’s case supra, require interference by this Court. The
petitioners are held entitled to Rs.15,000/ under the head
‘loss of estate’, Rs.40,000/ under the head ‘loss of
consortium’ and Rs.15,000/ under the head ‘funeral
expenses’.
193. In view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble
Supreme Court in s case supra , each claimant is
Nanu Ram’
entitled to the amount of compensation under the head ‘loss
of consortium’.
194. Thus, the entitlement of the petitioners, is
adjudicated, as under:
1. Loss of income = Rs.10,40,052/
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
106 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
2. Loss of consortium = Rs.1,60,000/
(Rs.40,000 x 4)
3. Loss of estate = Rs.15,000/
4. Funeral Expenses = Rs.15,000/
________________________________________________________
Total = Rs.12,30,052/.
________________________________________________________
195. So far as the rate of interest is concerned, the
said findings do not require any interference by this Court.
196. Consequently, the present appeal is disposed of,
and the awarded amount is enhanced from Rs.12,06,548/
to Rs.12,30,052/, with interest @ 7.5% per annum. The
award passed by the learned Tribunal is modified
accordingly.
FAO (MV) No.557 of 2016
197. The instant appeal has been preferred by the
Insurance Company against the award dated 01.09.2016,
passed by the learned Tribunal, in Claim Petition No. 06/2
of 2015, titled as ‘Rekha Devi & Others versus Meena
Kumari & Others’, whereby, a sum of Rs.21,50,000/, along
with interest, at the rate of 7.5% per annum, has been
awarded to the petitionersclaimants, from the date of filing
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
107 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
of the petition, till the date of deposit of the amount. The
ultimate liability to pay the amount of compensation has
been fastened upon the Insurance Company.
198. The petitionersclaimants, being widow, mother,
daughters and son of Thakur Dass, who expired, in the
accident, in question, involving the offending vehicle, have
filed the above noted petition, before the learned Tribunal,
seeking compensation of Rs.1,00,00,000/.
199. As per the claimants, Shri Thakur Dass had
sustained fatal injuries, in the accident, in question, and at
the time of death, his age has been pleaded to be 39 years.
According to the claimants, he was motor mechanic,
agriculturist and horticulturist. His income has been
pleaded Rs.25,000/ per month, from all sources.
200. Learned Tribunal has taken the age of Shri
Thakur Dass, as 39 years, on the basis of matriculation
examination certificate Ex.PW5/C. The said findings, being
based upon the documentary evidence, require no
interference by this Court.
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
108 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
201. In order to prove the earning of Shri Thakur
Dass, his wife appeared in the witnessbox as PW5, who
has filed her affidavit, which is based upon the assertions
made in the claim petition. However, she could not produce
any record with regard to the fact that Thakur Dass was
working as mechanic, during his life time. Apart from this,
the petitioners have examined PW2 Anil Kumar, proprietor
M/s Happy Motors. He has deposed that Thakur Dass was
working with him. He used to pay him Rs.10,000/ and
proved the receipts Ex.PW2/A to PW2/E. On the basis of
the said documents, the learned Tribunal has rightly taken
the earnings of Shri Thakur Dass, as Rs.10,000/ per
month. The said findings need no interference, by this
Court. However, the learned Tribunal has given 50%
increase, towards future prospects. The said findings
require interference by this Court, as per the mandate of
Hon’ble Supreme Court, in ’s case supra.
Pranay Sethi
202. Admittedly, Thakur Dass was working in
unorganized sector and his age is below 40 years, as such,
in view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
109 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
in ’s case supra, 40% increase is required to
Pranay Sethi
be given, towards future prospects. Thus, by adding 40% of
his monthly income, the same comes to Rs.14,000/
(Rs.10,000/ + Rs.4,000/).
203.. Out of the said amount, in view of the law laid
down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Sarla Verma’s case
supra, and keeping in view the number of dependents, 1/4th
amount, on account of his personal expenses, is required to
be deducted, had he been alive. Thus, his monthly income
comes to Rs.10,500/ (Rs.14,000/ minus Rs.3,500/).
204. Learned Tribunal has applied the multiplier of
‘15’, which is the appropriate multiplier to be applied, in the
present case. Thus, the loss of contribution comes to
Rs.10,500/x12 x 15 = Rs.18, 90,000/.
205. The learned Tribunal has awarded a sum of
Rs.25,000/ on account of funeral expenses and
Rs.1,00,000/, on account of consortium. The said findings,
as per the mandate of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in
Pranay
Sethi ’s case supra, require interference by this Court. The
petitioners are held entitled to Rs.15,000/ under the head
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
110 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
‘loss of estate’, Rs.40,000/ under the head ‘loss of
consortium’ and Rs.15,000/ under the head ‘funeral
expenses’.
206. In view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble
Supreme Court in s case , each claimant is
Nanu Ram’ supra
entitled to the amount of compensation under the head ‘loss
of consortium’.
207. Thus, the entitlement of the petitioners, is
adjudicated, as under:
1. Loss of income = Rs.18,90,000/
2. Loss of consortium = Rs.2,00,000/
(Rs.40,000 x 5)
3. Loss of estate = Rs.15,000/
4. Funeral Expenses = Rs.15,000/
________________________________________________________
Total = Rs.21,20,000/.
________________________________________________________
208. So far as the rate of interest is concerned, the
said findings do not require any interference by this Court.
209. Consequently, the present appeal is partly
allowed, and, the awarded amount is reduced from
Rs.21,50,000/ to Rs.21,20,000/, with interest @ 7.5% per
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
111 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
annum. The award passed by the learned Tribunal is
modified accordingly.
FAO (MV) No.558 of 2016
210. The instant appeal has been preferred by the
Insurance Company against the award dated 29.07.2016,
passed by the learned Tribunal, in Claim Petition No.41/2 of
2014, titled as ‘Rameshwari & Another versus Meena
Kumari & Others’, whereby, a sum of Rs.10,22,000/, along
with interest, at the rate of 7.5% per annum, has been
awarded to the petitionersclaimants, from the date of filing
of the petition, till the date of deposit of the amount. The
ultimate liability to pay the amount of compensation has
been fastened upon the Insurance Company.
211. The petitionersclaimants, being parents of Pooja
Kumari, who expired, in the accident, in question, involving
the offending vehicle, have filed the above noted petition,
before the learned Tribunal, seeking compensation of
Rs.20,00,000/.
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
112 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
212. As per the claimants, Ms. Pooja Kumari had
sustained fatal injuries, in the accident, in question, and at
the time of death, her age has been pleaded to be 20 years.
According to the claimants, she was pursuing B.A, and was
a trained ladies tailor. Her income has been pleaded
Rs.20,000/ per month, from all sources.
213. Learned Tribunal has taken the age of Ms. Pooja
Kumari, as 19 years, on the basis of matriculation
examination certificate Ex.PW4/D. The said findings, being
based upon the documentary evidence, require no
interference by this Court.
214. As regards, the contribution towards her family
by Ms. Pooja Kumari, the learned Tribunal, has taken her
contribution/earnings as ₹ 6,000/ per month. The said
amount, by any stretch of imagination, cannot be said to be
the value of the multifarious activities done by the grownup
girl, in the rural area, that too, round the clock, towards her
family. The Hon’ble Supreme Court, while considering its
decision in Kirti & Others versus Oriental Insurance
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
113 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
, has held in
Company Ltd, 2021 (1) ACJ 1 Shishu Pal @
reported in
Shish Ram & Others versus Surjeet & Others,
2026 INSC 634, that the value of the domestic care of a
homemaker is liable to be taken as Rs.30,000/ per month.
Relevant paragraphs 15 to 20, of the judgment, are
reproduced, as under :
Quantifying The Contributionof a Nation Builder
15. In usual circumstances this Court would not
have ventured further than taking note of the fact
that the incident and judgment in Lata Wadhwa
(supra) was contemporaneous to the unfortunate
accident in this case and as such compensation
could be calculated using the Rs.3000/ per
month metric applied therein however, in our
considered view that would not be justified. It
has to be observed that to measure the
contributions of a homemaker and mother as in
this case in strictly monetary terms is a task of
considerable difficulty for each and every aspect
of the day, month and year of such a
homemaker’s family members is informed,
shaped by her sometimes acknowledged, but
most often unacknowledged or taken for granted,
efforts. If compensation is to be calculated in the
present day while accounting for the egregious
delay, to do so in terms that were frozen on the
day of the death of the deceased would be
grossly undervaluing the silent strength of
homemakers.
16. That being said, even when it comes to
computation for damages under nonpecuniary
heads, the loss still does require the recognition
of such heads before compensation can be
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
114 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
awarded. The first of them being the loss of the
homemaker’s dexterous ability to manage all the
chores of the household. Granted, that in the
increasingly modern urban centres of the country
it may not be the case that a homemaker stands
in front of the gas stove bright and early in the
morning or late at night or even that she walks
around, slouched, running the broom throughout
the house, but, the fact of the matter is that in
smaller cities, towns and villages, even today,
such tasks assumedly and invariably fall on the
homemaker, without as much as a second
thought. The second head pertain to the children
of the house. They have lost their mother, the
source of neverending love, comfort and
affection, the person who they could run to with
all their problems, questions and concerns and
heartbreaks. She is also their first point of
contact with the ways of the world, silently and
subtly teaching them skills of survival,
perseverance and excellence shaping them into
well rounded human beings capable of being
functioning contributors to the economy of the
nation. This, in our view, is somewhat different
from emotional support or dependence for
primary skills necessary for everyday functioning
that are imbibed by the children from their
mother. This has a distinctly economic angle
while also being partly an emotional aspect
perfectly fitting into the noncategorizable roles
played by homemaker. How does one calculate
this? The third is equally troubling. A husband
has, no longer, the support of his life partner,
someone he depends on entirely to run smoothly,
an entire part of his life, his home, family,
children, relatives. Even in conservative settings
where patriarchy looms large, the sense of
dependency that obtains, if taken away, greatly
challenges the man for he is now directionless
and suddenly responsible for a lot more than he
is used to. When the efforts of the homemaker
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
115 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
towards the husband and children are taken on
the whole it cannot be disputed that although her
labour be at emotional or physical is within the
four walls of the home, its impact is much wider.
In enabling the direct contribution today of their
husbands and tomorrow of their children, they
are the building blocks for the nation’s road to
holistic progress.[See: Kalukutty v. P.M. John12,
Bhuvaneswari v. Mani13] We may also 2023
SCC OnLine Ker 964 2020 SCC OnLine Mad
2163 observe that in a recent order of this Court
in Arvind Kumar Pandey v. Girish Pandey , also
made similar observations to the following effect:
“7. It goes without saying that the role of a
homemaker is as important as that of a family
member whose income is tangible as a source of
livelihood for the family. The activities performed
by a homemaker, if counted one by one, there
will hardly be any doubt that the contribution of
a homemaker is of a high order and invaluable.
In fact, it is difficult to assess such a contribution
in monetary terms.”
Any computation made as a result of
injury suffered or death, should be aware of this
larger role and not be myopic in its view.
The loss of a homemaker however is not
limited to husband and children. It also directly
impacts the women’s own parents who have
been deprived of the love and company of their
child, who have lost the support and comfort of
this person and are left alone with this
boundless grief. Still further, the loss is acutely
felt by her inlaws who are more often than not
members of the same household and therefore
are dependent on the love, labour and dedication
of this person, for food for medicines and doctor’s
visit or for even the regular company over a
morning tea. Strict arithmetic calculation does not
lend its services to any of these scenarios.
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
116 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
17. It is settled law by virtue of National
Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi , that in all
cases that have resulted in death, loss of
consortium is to be paid to the claimants at the
rate of Rs.40,000/ per dependant along with
10% increase on the said amount every three
years, so in 2026 the compensation awarded
under this head is Rs.48,400/. This we may
note is irrespective of whether the deceased is a
male/female/child/retired/working or whatever
else. We are of the considered view, in such
situations the computation of compensation upon
the death of a homemaker suffers from an
inherent (2025) 2 SCC 145 (2017) 16 SCC 680
disadvantage. The amount awarded under the
same is over and above what is calculated on the
basis of the earnings/salaries/pension/notional
income for certain categories of claimants. In
view of the fact that there is no standard income
on the basis of which compensation can be
calculated and a figure is taken for the purposes
of calculation on guesswork, the true worth of the
homemaker is missed out, in as much as it is
amenable to calculation in monetary terms.
18. Future prospects when calculated on the
basis of the above judgment in Lata Wadhwa
(supra) would also be calculated on the
comparative lower notional income (Rs.3000/per
month) given that, both the fire incident and the
accident forming the basis of this appeal are from
the year 2001.
19. When such conservative figures are used to
build up compensation, the amount arrived at is
paltry, and not even close, as much as monetary
terms can be, to the loss endured by the
claimants. Notional income is intended to
approximate the economic value of in the case of
homemaker, services rendered by them.
However, for whatever reason, judicial notice of
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
117 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
this issue is usually overly conservative, without
due acknowledgment of the fact that the role of
the homemaker is neither entirely economic nor
entirely noneconomic and blends the factors of
economy with emotional and managerial
contributions and as such fixed compensation in
terms of loss of consortium does not cover the
entire gamut of their contribution.
Loss Of Domestic Care: An Additional Head
20. It is in these circumstances, that we deem it
appropriate to direct that when a Motor Accidents
Claim Tribunal or the High Court or this Court is
concerned with or a case involving the death of a
homemaker, in order to overcome the inherent
disadvantage accrued against the homemaker on
a calculation of compensation on the basis of
conservatively computed notional income and
while being acutely aware of the dictum in
Pranay Sethi (supra) regarding loss of consortium
as also the disposition towards uniformity, that
for the three major heads (the homemaker’s
contribution towards smooth functioning of the
household, the loss of maternal support for
children and loss of spousal support/the support
and care of their child who is an adult, for the
parents of the deceased) discussed in the
foregoing paragraphs, a composite sum of
Rs.30,000/ shall be added under the head of
‘loss of domestic care’, provided that all three of
these heads are met in the given case. This
determination shall be revised by 10%,
cumulatively, every three years. It may be clearly
stated that this amount of Rs.30,000/ i.e., loss
of domestic care is to be taken as a ‘stand in’
(basic minimum monthly income) for monthly
income in those cases where the homemaker
does not have an input into the house, in strictly
conventional, monetary terms. In those cases
where the homemaker is part of the workforce,
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
118 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
the component of loss of domestic care shall be in
addition to the monthly income as may be proved
before the Tribunal/Courts.”
215. Since, the accident, in question, had taken place
in the year 2014, this Court is of the view that in the light of
the mandate of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Shishu Pal ’s
case (supra), ends of justice would be met, if the
contribution of Ms. Pooja Kumari, during her life time is
taken, as Rs.10,000/, per month.
216. The learned Tribunal has fallen into error by
giving 50% increase, towards future prospects. The said
findings require interference by this Court.
217. Admittedly, Ms. Pooja Kumari was working in
unorganized sector and her age is below 40 years, as such,
in view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court
in Pranay Sethi ’s case supra, 40% increase is required to
be given, towards future prospects, had she been alive.
Thus, by adding 40% of her monthly income, the same
comes to Rs.14,000/ (Rs.10,000/ + Rs.4,000/).
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
119 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
218. Out of the said amount, in view of the law laid
down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Sarla Verma’s case
supra, and keeping in view the fact that the deceased was
bachelor, 50% amount, on account of her personal expenses,
is required to be deducted, had she been alive. Thus, her
monthly income comes to Rs.7,000/ (Rs.14,000/ minus
Rs.7,000/).
219. Learned Tribunal has applied the multiplier of
‘18’, which is the appropriate multiplier to be applied, in the
present case. Thus, the loss of contribution comes to
Rs.7,000/x12 x 18 = Rs.15,12,000/.
220. The learned Tribunal has awarded a sum of
Rs.25,000/ on account of funeral expenses and
Rs.25,000/, on account of love and affection. The said
findings, as per the mandate of the Hon’ble Supreme Court
in ’s case supra, require interference by this
Pranay Sethi
Court. The petitioners are held entitled to Rs.15,000/
under the head ‘loss of estate’, Rs.40,000/ under the head
‘loss of consortium’ and Rs.15,000/ under the head ‘funeral
expenses’.
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
120 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
221. In view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble
Supreme Court in Nanu Ram’ s case supra , each claimant is
entitled to the amount of compensation under the head ‘loss
of consortium’.
222. Thus, the entitlement of the petitioners, is
adjudicated, as under:
1. Loss of income = Rs.15,12,000/
2. Loss of consortium = Rs.80,000/
(Rs.40,000 x 2)
3. Loss of estate = Rs.15,000/
4. Funeral Expenses = Rs.15,000/
________________________________________________________
Total = Rs.16,22,000/.
________________________________________________________
223. So far as the rate of interest is concerned, the
said findings do not require any interference by this Court.
224. Consequently, the present appeal is disposed of,
and the awarded amount is enhanced from Rs.10,22,000/
to Rs.16,22,000/, with interest @ 7.5% per annum. The
award passed by the learned MACT is modified accordingly.
FAO (MV) No.567 of 2016
225. The instant appeal has been preferred by the
Insurance Company against the award dated 29.07.2016,
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
121 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
passed by the learned Tribunal, in Claim Petition No. 35/2
of 2014, titled as ‘Dropati Devi & Others versus Meena
Kumari & Others’, whereby, a sum of Rs.38,96,612/, along
with interest, at the rate of 7.5% per annum, has been
awarded to the petitionersclaimants, from the date of filing
of the petition, till the date of deposit of the amount. The
ultimate liability to pay the amount of compensation has
been fastened upon the Insurance Company.
226. The petitionersclaimants, being widow, mother,
sons and daughter of Nathu Ram, who expired, in the
accident, in question, involving the offending vehicle, have
filed the above noted petition, before the learned Tribunal,
seeking compensation of Rs.50,00,000/.
227. As per the claimants, Shri Nathu Ram had
sustained fatal injuries, in the accident, in question, and at
the time of death, his age has been pleaded to be 49 years.
According to the claimants, he was Government employee.
His income has been pleaded Rs. 55,000/ per month, from
all sources.
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
122 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
228. The petitioners, in order to prove the earnings of
Shri Nathu Ram, during his life time, have examined Mehar
Singh, Junior Assistant, CMO Office Bilaspur, who has
proved the salary certificate of Shri Nathu Ram, for the
month of August 2014, as Ex.PW3/A, in which, his salary
has been mentioned as Rs.24,797/.
229. Although, in this case, petitioner No.1, in her
examination in chief, has taken the stand that her husband
was also earning Rs.20,000/ per month from agricultural
pursuits, but, considering the fact that he was a
Government employee, it cannot be said that in addition to
the salary, he was earning anything.
230. Learned Tribunal has taken the age of Shri Nathu
Ram, as 50 years. The said findings require no interference
by this Court.
231. Learned Tribunal has taken the earnings of Shri
Nathu Ram, as Rs.24,797/ per month and the learned
Tribunal has given 30% increase, towards future prospects.
The said findings are not required to be interfered with, by
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
123 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
this Court, as per the mandate of Hon’ble Supreme Court, in
Pranay Sethi ’s case supra.
232. Admittedly, Nathu Ram was working in organized
sector and his age is 50 years, as such, in view of the law
laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in ’s
Pranay Sethi
case supra, 30% increase is required to be given, towards
future prospects. Thus, by adding 30% of his monthly
income, the same comes to Rs.32,236/ (Rs.24,797/ +
Rs.7,439/). Thus, his annual income comes to
Rs.3,86,832/ (Rs.32,236/x12). The income tax component
is liable to be deducted from the said income.
233. The age of the deceased, at the time of accident
was held to be 50 years. As per the income tax slab,
applicable for the financial year 201314, income upto
Rs.2,50,000/ was exempted. Thus, out of Rs.3,86,832/,
the amount of total taxable income comes to Rs.1,36,832/
(Rs.3,86,832/ minus Rs.2,50,000/). The said income falls
within the tax slab of 10%. Thus, the tax component comes
to Rs.13,683/. The education cess @3% on the said
amount of Rs.13,683/ is also liable to be deducted, which
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
124 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
comes to Rs.410/. Thus, the total tax component comes to
Rs.14,093/. Hence, the total established annual income of
the deceased comes to Rs.3,86,832/ minus Rs.14,093/ =
Rs.3,72,739/.
234. Out of the said amount, in view of the law laid
down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Sarla Verma’s case
supra, and keeping in view the number of dependents, 1/4th
amount, on account of his personal expenses, is required to
be deducted, had he been alive. Thus, his monthly income
comes to Rs.2,79,555/ (Rs.3,72,739/ minus Rs.93,184/).
235. Learned Tribunal has applied the multiplier of
‘13’, which is the appropriate multiplier to be applied, in the
present case. Thus, the loss of contribution comes to
Rs.2,79,555/ x 13 = Rs.36,34,215/.
236. The learned Tribunal has awarded a sum of
Rs.25,000/ on account of funeral expenses and
Rs.1,00,000/, on account of consortium. The said findings,
as per the mandate of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in
Pranay
’s case supra, require interference by this Court. The
Sethi
petitioners are held entitled to Rs.15,000/ under the head
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
125 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
‘loss of estate’, Rs.40,000/ under the head ‘loss of
consortium’ and Rs.15,000/ under the head ‘funeral
expenses’.
237. In view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble
Supreme Court in s case , each claimant is
Nanu Ram’ supra
entitled to the amount of compensation under the head ‘loss
of consortium’.
238. Thus, the entitlement of the petitioners, is
adjudicated, as under:
1. Loss of income = Rs.36,34,215/
2. Loss of consortium = Rs.2,00,000/
(Rs.40,000 x 5)
3. Loss of estate = Rs.15,000/
4. Funeral Expenses = Rs.15,000/
________________________________________________________
Total = Rs.38,64,215/.
________________________________________________________
239. So far as the rate of interest is concerned, the
said findings do not require any interference by this Court.
240. Consequently, the present appeal is partly
allowed, and the awarded amount is reduced from
Rs.38,96,612/ to Rs. 38,64,215/, with interest @ 7.5% per
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
126 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
annum. The award passed by the learned Tribunal is
modified accordingly.
FAO (MV) No.568 of 2016
241. The instant appeal has been preferred by the
Insurance Company against the award dated 01.08.2016,
passed by the learned Tribunal, in Claim Petition No. 34/2
of 2014, titled as ‘Soma Devi & Others versus Meena Kumari
& Others’, whereby, a sum of Rs.20,45,000/, along with
interest, at the rate of 7.5% per annum, has been awarded to
the petitionersclaimants, from the date of filing of the
petition, till the date of deposit of the amount. The ultimate
liability to pay the amount of compensation has been
fastened upon the Insurance Company.
242. The petitionersclaimants, being widow, mother,
son and daughter of Prem Sagar, who expired, in the
accident, in question, involving the offending vehicle, have
filed the above noted petition, before the learned Tribunal,
seeking compensation of Rs.30,00,000/.
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
127 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
243. As per the claimants, Shri Prem Sagar had
sustained fatal injuries, in the accident, in question, and at
the time of death, his age has been pleaded to be 30 years.
According to the claimants, he was a trained mason. His
income has been pleaded Rs.30,000/ per month, from all
sources.
244. Learned Tribunal has taken the age of Shri Prem
Sagar, as 31 years, on the basis of Pariwar Register Ex.PW
4/C. The said findings, being based upon the documentary
evidence, require no interference by this Court.
245. The learned Tribunal has taken the earnings of
Shri Prem Sagar, as Rs.10,000/ per month. The said
findings are not based upon the appropriate appreciation of
the oral evidence. As such, the monthly income of Shri Prem
Sagar is required to be reduced to Rs.8,000/. The learned
Tribunal has given 50% increase, towards future prospects.
The said findings also require interference by this Court, as
per the mandate of Hon’ble Supreme Court, in Pranay
’s case supra.
Sethi
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
128 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
246. Admittedly, Prem Sagar was working in
unorganized sector and his age is below 40 years, as such,
in view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court
in Pranay Sethi ’s case supra, 40% increase is required to
be given, towards future prospects. Thus, by adding 40% of
his monthly income, the same comes to Rs.11,200/
(Rs.8,000/ + Rs.3,200/).
247. Out of the said amount, in view of the law laid
down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Sarla Verma’s case
th
supra, and keeping in view the number of dependents, 1/4
amount, on account of his personal expenses, is required to
be deducted, had he been alive. Thus, his monthly income
comes to Rs.8,400/ (Rs.11,200/ minus Rs.2,800/).
248. Learned Tribunal has applied the multiplier of
‘16’, which is the appropriate multiplier to be applied, in the
present case. Thus, the loss of contribution comes to
Rs.8,400/x12 x 16 = Rs.16,12,800/.
249. The learned Tribunal has awarded a sum of
Rs.25,000/ on account of funeral expenses and
Rs.1,00,000/, on account of consortium. The said findings,
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
129 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
as per the mandate of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in
Pranay
’s case supra, require interference by this Court. The
Sethi
petitioners are held entitled to Rs.15,000/ under the head
‘loss of estate’, Rs.40,000/ under the head ‘loss of
consortium’ and Rs.15,000/ under the head ‘funeral
expenses’.
250. In view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble
Supreme Court in Nanu Ram’ s case supra , each claimant is
entitled to the amount of compensation under the head ‘loss
of consortium’.
251. Thus, the entitlement of the petitioners, is
adjudicated, as under:
1. Loss of income = Rs.16,12,800/
2. Loss of consortium = Rs.1,60,000/
(Rs.40,000 x 4)
3. Loss of estate = Rs.15,000/
4. Funeral Expenses = Rs.15,000/
________________________________________________________
Total = Rs.18,02,800/.
________________________________________________________
252. So far as the rate of interest is concerned, the
said findings do not require any interference by this Court.
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
130 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
253. Consequently, the present appeal is partly
allowed, and the awarded amount is reduced from
Rs.20,45,000/ to Rs.18,02,800/, with interest @ 7.5% per
annum. The award passed by the learned Tribunal is
modified accordingly.
FAO (MV) No.538 of 2018
254. The instant appeal has been preferred by the
Insurance Company against the award dated 10.08.2018,
passed by the learned Tribunal, in MAC No. 472 of 2014,
titled as ‘Vyasa Devi @ Bhaga Devi & Another versus Meena
Kumari & Others’, whereby, a sum of Rs.11,50,000/, along
with interest, at the rate of 9% per annum, has been
awarded to the petitionersclaimants, from the date of filing
of the petition, till the date of deposit of the amount. The
ultimate liability to pay the amount of compensation has
been fastened upon the Insurance Company.
255. The petitionersclaimants, being parents of
Poonam Devi, who expired, in the accident, in question,
involving the offending vehicle, have filed the above noted
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
131 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
petition, before the learned Tribunal, seeking compensation
of Rs.20,00,000/.
256. As per the claimants, Ms. Poonam Devi had
sustained fatal injuries, in the accident, in question, and at
the time of death, her age has been pleaded to be 18 years.
According to the claimants, she was pursuing BA from
Ghumarwin College and was a trained ladies tailor. Her
income has been pleaded Rs.20,000/ per month, from all
sources.
257. Learned Tribunal has taken the age of Ms.
Poonam Devi, as 18 years, on the basis of document Ex.PW
3/J. The said findings, being based upon the documentary
evidence, require no interference by this Court.
258. The learned Tribunal has taken the earnings of
Ms. Poonam Devi, as Rs.10,000/ per month. The said
findings do not require any interference by this Court,
considering the multifarious activities done by the female, in
the household, that too, round the clock, towards her family.
However, the learned Tribunal has not given any increase,
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
132 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
towards her future prospects. The said findings require
interference by this Court, as per the mandate of Hon’ble
Supreme Court, in ’s case supra.
Pranay Sethi
259. Admittedly, Poonam Devi was working in
unorganized sector and her age is below 40 years, as such,
in view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court
in Pranay Sethi ’s case supra, 40% increase is required to
be given, towards future prospects. Thus, by adding 40% of
his monthly income, the same comes to Rs.14,000/
(Rs.10,000/ + Rs.4,000/).
260. Out of the said amount, in view of the law laid
down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Sarla Verma’s case
supra, and keeping in view the fact that the deceased was
bachelor, 50% amount, on account of her personal expenses,
is required to be deducted, had she been alive. Thus, her
monthly income comes to Rs.7,000/ (Rs.14,000/ minus
Rs.7,000/).
261. Learned Tribunal has applied the multiplier of
‘18’, which is the appropriate multiplier to be applied, in the
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
133 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
present case. Thus, the loss of contribution comes to
Rs.7,000/x12 x 18 = Rs.15,12,000/.
262. The learned Tribunal has awarded a sum of
Rs.15,000/ on account of funeral expenses, Rs.15,000/,
on account of loss of estate and Rs.40,000/, on account of
loss of love and affection. The said findings, as per the
mandate of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Pranay Sethi ’s
case supra, require interference by this Court. The
petitioners are held entitled to Rs.15,000/ under the head
‘loss of estate’, Rs.40,000/ under the head ‘loss of
consortium’ and Rs.15,000/ under the head ‘funeral
expenses’.
263. In view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble
Supreme Court in Nanu Ram’ s case supra , each claimant is
entitled to the amount of compensation under the head ‘loss
of consortium’.
264. Thus, the entitlement of the petitioners, is
adjudicated, as under:
1. Loss of income = Rs.15,12,000/
2. Loss of consortium = Rs.80,000/
(Rs.40,000 x 2)
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
134 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
3. Loss of estate = Rs.15,000/
4. Funeral Expenses = Rs.15,000/
________________________________________________________
Total = Rs.16,22,000/.
________________________________________________________
265. So far as the rate of interest is concerned, the
learned Tribunal has awarded the interest at the rate of 9%,
which is also liable to be interfered with, keeping in view the
prevailing rate of interest being awarded by the nationalized
banks on fixed deposits and it would be just and appropriate
for this Court to reduce the same from 9% to 7.5%.
266. Consequently, the present appeal is partly
allowed, and, the awarded amount is enhanced from
Rs.11,50,000/ to Rs.16,22,000/, however, with reduced
rate of interest @ 7.5% per annum. The award passed by
the learned Tribunal is modified accordingly.
FAO (MV) No.539 of 2018
267. The instant appeal has been preferred by the
Insurance Company against the award dated 10.08.2018,
passed by the learned Tribunal, in MAC No. 462 of 2014,
titled as ‘Kaushalya Devi @ Geeta Devi & Another versus
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
135 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
Meena Kumari & Others’, whereby, a sum of Rs.11,50,000/,
along with interest, at the rate of 9% per annum, has been
awarded to the petitionersclaimants, from the date of filing
of the petition, till the date of deposit of the amount. The
ultimate liability to pay the amount of compensation has
been fastened upon the Insurance Company.
268. The petitionersclaimants, being parents of
Mandeep Kumar, who expired, in the accident, in question,
involving the offending vehicle, have filed the above noted
petition, before the learned Tribunal, seeking compensation
of Rs.20,00,000/.
269. As per the claimants, Shri Mandeep Kumar had
sustained fatal injuries, in the accident, in question, and at
the time of death, his age has been pleaded to be 17½
years. According to the claimants, he was pursuing Diploma
in Electric Trade from ITI. In addition to this, he used to
assist private electric contractor, in his contract work and
was earning Rs.5,000/. His earning has been pleaded
Rs.20,000/, per month, from all sources.
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
136 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
270. Learned Tribunal has taken the age of Shri
Mandeep Kumar, as 17½ years, on the basis of document
Ex.PW3/D. The said findings, being based upon the
documentary evidence, require no interference by this Court.
271. Learned Tribunal has taken the earnings of Shri
Mandeep Kumar, as Rs.6,000/, per month. The said
findings require no interference, being based upon the
proper appreciation of oral, as well as, documentary
evidence. The deceased was a young man, who was
pursuing ITI Diploma in Electric Trade and working as
helper with a contractor.
272. The learned Tribunal has not given increase,
towards future prospects. The said findings require
interference by this Court, as per the mandate of Hon’ble
Supreme Court, in Pranay Sethi ’s case supra.
273. Admittedly, Mandeep Kumar was working in
unorganized sector and his age is below 40 years, as such,
in view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court
in ’s case supra, 40% increase is required to
Pranay Sethi
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
137 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
be given, towards future prospects. Thus, by adding 40% of
his monthly income, the same comes to Rs.8,400/
(Rs.6,000/ + Rs.2,400/).
274. Out of the said amount, in view of the law laid
down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case
Sarla Verma’s
supra, and keeping in view the fact that the deceased was
bachelor, 50% amount, on account of his personal expenses,
is required to be deducted, had he been alive. Thus, his
monthly income comes to Rs.4,200/ (Rs.8,400/ minus
Rs.4,200/).
275. Learned Tribunal has applied the multiplier of
‘18’, which is the appropriate multiplier to be applied, in the
present case. Thus, the loss of contribution comes to
Rs.4,200/x12 x 18 = Rs.9,07,200/.
276. The learned Tribunal has awarded a sum of
Rs.15,000/ on account of loss of estate, Rs.15,000/ on
account of funeral expenses and Rs.40,000/, on account of
consortium/love and affection. The said findings, as per the
mandate of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in ’s
Pranay Sethi
case supra, require no interference by this Court, however,
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
138 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
in view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court
in Nanu Ram’ s case supra , each claimant is entitled to the
amount of compensation under the head ‘loss of
consortium’.
277. Thus, the entitlement of the petitioners, is
adjudicated, as under:
1. Loss of income = Rs.9,07,200/
2. Loss of consortium = Rs.80,000/
(Rs.40,000 x 2)
3. Loss of estate = Rs.15,000/
4. Funeral Expenses = Rs.15,000/
________________________________________________________
Total = Rs.10,17,200/.
________________________________________________________
278. So far as the rate of interest is concerned, the
learned Tribunal has awarded the interest at the rate of 9%,
which is also liable to be interfered with, keeping in view the
prevailing rate of interest being awarded by the nationalized
banks on fixed deposit and it would be just and appropriate
for this Court to reduce the same from 9% to 7.5%.
279. Consequently, the present appeal is partly
allowed, and the awarded amount is reduced from
Rs.11,50,000/ to Rs.10,17,200/, with reduced interest @
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
139 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
7.5% per annum. The award passed by the learned Tribunal
is modified accordingly.
FAO (MV) No.232 of 2019
280. The instant appeal has been preferred by the
Insurance Company against the award dated 12.04.2019,
passed by the learned Tribunal, in MAC No. 2/2 of 2015,
titled as ‘Dhruvender Surya versus Sunil Kumar & Others’,
whereby, a sum of Rs.12,22,000/, along with interest, at
the rate of 9% per annum, has been awarded to the
petitionerclaimant, from the date of filing of the petition, till
the date of deposit of the amount. The ultimate liability to
pay the amount of compensation has been fastened upon
the Insurance Company.
281. The petitionerclaimant, being husband of Anjna
Surya, who expired, in the accident, in question, involving
the offending vehicle, has filed the above noted petition,
before the learned Tribunal, seeking compensation of
Rs.50,00,000/.
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
140 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
282. As per the claimant, Ms. Anjna Surya had
sustained fatal injuries, in the accident, in question, and at
the time of death, her age has been pleaded to be 35 years of
age. According to the claimant, she was lecturer in the
Shivam Institute of Vocational Training, Ghumarwin. Her
income has been pleaded Rs.8,000/, per month, from all
sources.
283. In order to prove the earnings of the Anjna Surya,
during her life time, the petitioner has produced salary
certificate Ex.PW3/F, according to which, Ms. Anjna Surya
was working with Shivam Institute for Vocational Training,
as Senior IT Faculty, on contract basis and she was getting
Rs.8,000/ per month. The said certificate has duly been
proved by the PW5, Satish Sharma, Chairman of the
Institute.
284. Learned Tribunal has taken the age of Ms. Anjna
Surya, as 35 years, on the basis of copy of Pariwar Register
Ex.PW3/E. The said findings, being based upon the
documentary evidence, require no interference by this Court.
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
141 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
285. The learned Tribunal has taken the earnings of
Ms. Anjna Surya, as Rs.8,000/ per month, however, the
said findings are required to be interfered with, by this
Court, considering the multifarious activities done by the
female, in the household, that too, round the clock, towards
her family. As such, the contribution of deceased towards
her family can be said to be Rs.8,000/ +Rs.4,000/ (on
account of multifarious activities done by the female in the
house hold) = Rs.12,000/, per month.
286. The learned Tribunal has given 50% increase,
towards future prospects. The said findings do not require
any interference by this Court.
287. Admittedly, Anjna Surya was working in
organized sector and her age is below 40 years, as such, in
view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in
Pranay Sethi ’s case supra, 50% increase is required to be
given, towards future prospects. Thus, by adding 50% of his
monthly income, the same comes to Rs.18,000/
(Rs.12,000/ + Rs.6,000/).
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
142 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
288. Out of the said amount, in view of the law laid
down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Sarla Verma’s case
rd
supra, and keeping in view the number of dependents, 1/3
amount, on account of her personal expenses, is required to
be deducted, had she been alive. Thus, her monthly income
comes to Rs.12,000/ (Rs.18,000/ minus Rs.6,000/).
289. Learned Tribunal has applied the multiplier of
‘100 ( sic .)’, which is not the appropriate multiplier to be
applied, in the present case. The findings of the learned
Tribunal, are required to be interfered with, as, keeping in
view the age of the deceased, ‘16’ is the appropriate
multiplier to be applied in the present case. Thus, the loss of
contribution comes to Rs.12,000/x12x16 = Rs.23,04,000/.
290. The learned Tribunal has awarded a sum of
Rs.15,000/ on account of funeral expenses, Rs.15,000/,
on account of loss of estate and Rs.40,000/, on account of
consortium. The said findings, as per the mandate of the
Hon’ble Supreme Court in Pranay Sethi ’s case supra,
require no interference by this Court.
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
143 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
291. Thus, the entitlement of the petitioners, is
adjudicated, as under:
1. Loss of income = Rs.23,04,000/
2. Loss of consortium = Rs.40,000/
3. Loss of estate = Rs.15,000/
4. Funeral Expenses = Rs.15,000/
________________________________________________________
Total = Rs.23,74,000/.
________________________________________________________
292. So far as the rate of interest is concerned, the
learned Tribunal has awarded the interest at the rate of 9%,
which is also liable to be interfered with, keeping in view the
prevailing rate of interest being awarded by the nationalized
banks on fixed deposits and it would be just and appropriate
for this Court to reduce the same from 9% to 7.5%.
293. Consequently, the present appeal is partly
allowed. The awarded amount is enhanced from
Rs.12,22,000/ to Rs.23,74,000/, however, with reduced
interest @ 7.5% per annum. The award passed by the
learned Tribunal is modified accordingly.
FAO (MV) No.86 of 2020
294. The instant appeal has been preferred by the
Insurance Company against the award dated 02.12.2019,
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
144 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
passed by the learned Tribunal, in Claim Petition No. 24 of
2015, titled as ‘Roshani Devi versus Meena Kumari &
Others’, whereby, a sum of Rs.8,86,800/, along with
interest, at the rate of 9% per annum, has been awarded to
the petitionerclaimant, from the date of filing of the petition,
till the date of deposit of the amount. The ultimate liability
to pay the amount of compensation has been fastened upon
the Insurance Company.
295. The petitionerclaimant, being mother of
Surender Kumar, who expired, in the accident, in question,
involving the offending vehicle, has filed the above noted
petition, before the learned Tribunal, seeking compensation
of Rs.40,00,000/.
296. As per the claimant, Shri Surender Kumar had
sustained fatal injuries, in the accident, in question, and at
the time of death, his age has been pleaded to be 28 years.
According to the claimant, Shri Surender Kumar, during his
life time, was agriculturist, horticulturist and contractor by
profession. His income has been pleaded Rs.40,000/ per
month, from all sources.
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
145 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
297. Learned Tribunal has taken the age of Shri
Surender Kumar, as 28 years, on the basis of matriculation
examination certificate Ex.PW1/B. The said findings, being
based upon the documentary evidence, require no
interference by this Court.
298. The learned Tribunal has taken the earnings of
Shri Surender Kumar, as Rs.6,000/ per month. The said
findings of the learned Tribunal are required to be interfered
with. As such, the monthly income of Shri Surender Kumar
is required to be enhanced to Rs.8,000/, keeping in view
the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case.
The learned Tribunal has rightly given 40% increase,
towards future prospects. Thus, by adding 40% towards the
future prospects, his monthly income comes to Rs.11,200/
(Rs.8,000/ + Rs.3,200/).
299. Out of the said amount, in view of the law laid
down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case
Sarla Verma’s
supra, and keeping in view the fact that the deceased was
bachelor, 50% amount, on account of his personal expenses,
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
146 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
is required to be deducted, had he been alive. Thus, his
monthly income comes to Rs.5,600/ (Rs.11,200/ minus
Rs.5,600/).
300. Learned Tribunal has applied the multiplier of
‘17’, which is the appropriate multiplier to be applied, in the
present case. Thus, the loss of contribution comes to
Rs.5,600/x12 x 17 = Rs.11,42,400/.
301. The learned Tribunal has not awarded the
amount under the head ‘loss of consortium’. The said
findings, as per the mandate of the Hon’ble Supreme Court
in ’s case supra, require interference by this
Pranay Sethi
Court. The petitioners are held entitled to Rs.15,000/
under the head ‘loss of estate’, Rs.40,000/ under the head
‘loss of consortium’ and Rs.15,000/ under the head ‘funeral
expenses’.
302. Thus, the entitlement of the petitioners, is
adjudicated, as under:
1. Loss of income = Rs.11,42,400/
2. Loss of consortium = Rs.40,000/
3. Loss of estate = Rs.15,000/
4. Funeral Expenses = Rs.15,000/
________________________________________________________
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
147 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
Total = Rs.12,12,400/.
________________________________________________________
303. So far as the rate of interest is concerned, the
learned Tribunal has awarded the interest at the rate of 9%,
which is also liable to be interfered with, keeping in view the
prevailing rate of interest being awarded by the nationalized
banks on fixed deposits and it would be just and appropriate
for this Court to reduce the same from 9% to 7.5%.
304. Consequently, the present appeal is partly
allowed. The awarded amount is enhanced from
Rs.8,86,800/ to Rs.12,12,400/, however, with reduced
interest @ 7.5% per annum. The award passed by the
learned Tribunal is modified accordingly.
FAO (MV) No.61 of 2026
305. The instant appeal has been preferred by the
Insurance Company against the award dated 12.11.2025,
passed by the learned Tribunal, in MAC No. 16 of 2014,
titled as ‘Deepan Devi & Others versus Sunil Kumar &
Others’, whereby, a sum of Rs.9,98,836/, along with
interest, at the rate of 7.5% per annum, has been awarded to
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
148 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
the petitionersclaimants, from the date of filing of the
petition, till the date of deposit of the amount. The ultimate
liability to pay the amount of compensation has been
fastened upon the Insurance Company.
306. The petitionersclaimants, being widow, sons and
daughters of Nand Lal, who expired, in the accident, in
question, involving the offending vehicle, have filed the above
noted petition, before the learned Tribunal, seeking
compensation of Rs.50,00,000/.
307. Initially, the parents of the deceased, were also
impleaded as petitioners No.2 and 3, but, on account of their
death, their names were ordered to be deleted vide order
dated 04.06.2025.
308. As per the claimants, Shri Nand Lal, had
sustained fatal injuries, in the accident, in question, and at
the time of death, his age has been pleaded to be 48 years.
According to the claimants, he was agriculturist and mason
by profession. His earnings have been pleaded Rs.30,000/,
per month, from all sources.
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
149 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
309. Learned Tribunal has taken the age of Shri Nand
Lal, as 49 years, on the basis of copy of Pariwar Register
Mark P1. The said findings, being based upon the
documentary evidence, require no interference by this Court.
310. Learned Tribunal has taken the earnings of Shri
Nand Lal, as Rs.5,100/, per month. The said findings are
required to be interfered with. The oral evidence of
petitioner No.1, Deepan Devi, qua the fact that her husband
was mason by profession and earning Rs.6,000/, cannot be
ignored. As such, the monthly income of Shri Nand Lal can
safely be held to be Rs. 6,000/.
311. The learned Tribunal has given 25% increase,
towards future prospects. The said findings require no
interference by this Court, as per the mandate of Hon’ble
Supreme Court, in Pranay Sethi ’s case supra. Admittedly,
Nand Lal was working in unorganized sector and his age is
proved to be 49 years, as such, in view of the law laid down
by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Pranay Sethi ’s case
supra, 25% increase is required to be given, towards future
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
150 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
prospects. Thus, by adding 25% of his monthly income, the
same comes to Rs.7,500/ (Rs.6,000/ + Rs.1,500/).
312. Out of the said amount, in view of the law laid
down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case
Sarla Verma’s
supra, and keeping in view the number of dependents,
including his parents, who were expired during the
pendency of the lis and their names were ordered to be
th
deleted, 1/5 amount, on account of his personal expenses,
is required to be deducted, had he been alive. Thus, his
monthly income comes to Rs.6,000/ (Rs.7,500/ minus
Rs.1,500/).
313. Learned Tribunal has applied the multiplier of
‘13’, which is the appropriate multiplier to be applied, in the
present case. Thus, the loss of contribution comes to
Rs.6,000/x12 x 13 = Rs.9,36,000/.
314. The learned Tribunal has awarded a sum of
Rs.15,000/ on account of loss of estate, Rs.15,000/ on
account of funeral expenses and Rs.40,000/, on account of
consortium. The said findings, as per the mandate of the
Hon’ble Supreme Court in Pranay Sethi ’s case supra,
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
151 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
require no interference by this Court, however, in view of the
law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Nanu Ram’ s
case supra , each claimant is entitled to the amount of
compensation under the head ‘loss of consortium’.
315. Learned Tribunal has given the increase of 10%
on the amount awarded under the head ‘loss of estate’,
‘consortium’ and ‘funeral charges’. The said findings of the
learned Tribunal require interference, as the accident had
taken place in the year 2014 and the judgment in
Pranay
s case supra, was delivered in the year 2017.
Sethi’
316. Thus, the entitlement of the petitioners, is
adjudicated, as under:
1. Loss of income = Rs.9,36,000/
2. Loss of consortium = Rs.2,00,000/
(Rs.40,000 x 5)
3. Loss of estate = Rs.15,000/
4. Funeral Expenses = Rs.15,000/
________________________________________________________
Total = Rs.11,66,000/.
________________________________________________________
317. So far as the rate of interest is concerned, the
said findings require no interference by this Court.
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
152 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
318. Consequently, the present appeal is disposed of,
and, the awarded amount is enhanced from Rs.9,98,836/ to
Rs.11,66,000/, with interest @ 7.5% per annum. The
award passed by the learned Tribunal is modified
accordingly.
FAO (MV) No.62 of 2026
319. The instant appeal has been preferred by the
Insurance Company against the award dated 12.11.2025,
passed by the learned Tribunal, in MAC No. 10 of 2014,
titled as ‘Sunita Devi & Another versus Sunil Kumar alias
Sonu & Others’, whereby, a sum of Rs.11,49,160/, along
with interest, at the rate of 7.5% per annum, has been
awarded to the petitionersclaimants, from the date of filing
of the petition, till the date of deposit of the amount. The
ultimate liability to pay the amount of compensation has
been fastened upon the Insurance Company.
320. The petitionersclaimants, being parents of Ankit,
who expired, in the accident, in question, involving the
offending vehicle, have filed the above noted petition, before
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
153 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
the learned Tribunal, seeking compensation of
Rs.50,00,000/.
321. Initially, the grandmother of the deceased, was
also impleaded as petitioner No.3, but, on account of her
death, her name was ordered to be deleted vide order dated
04.06.2025.
322. As per the claimants, Shri Ankit, had sustained
fatal injuries, in the accident, in question, and at the time of
death, his age has been pleaded to be 21 years. According to
the claimants, he was Barber by profession. His earnings
have been pleaded to be Rs.15,000/ per month.
323. Learned Tribunal has taken the age of Shri Ankit,
as 20 years, on the basis of copy of Pariwar Register Mark P
Y. The said findings, being based upon the documentary
evidence, require no interference by this Court.
324. Learned Tribunal has taken the earnings of Shri
Ankit, as Rs.5,100/, per month, on the basis of minimum
wages, fixed for the unskilled workers. The deceased, being
Barber, cannot be said to be unskilled worker. In such
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
154 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
situation, his monthly income can be said to be Rs.6,000/.
325. The learned Tribunal has given 40% increase,
towards future prospects. The said findings require no
interference by this Court, as per the mandate of Hon’ble
Supreme Court, in ’s case supra.
Pranay Sethi
326. Admittedly, Ankit was working in unorganized
sector and his age is proved to be 20 years, as such, in view
of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in
Pranay Sethi ’s case supra, 40% increase is required to be
given, towards future prospects. Thus, by adding 40% of his
monthly income, the same comes to Rs.8,400/ (Rs.6,000/
+ Rs.2,400/).
327. Learned Tribunal has fallen into an error in
rd
deducting 1/3 amount, on account of personal expenses. In
view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in
case supra, and keeping in view the fact that
Sarla Verma’s
the deceased was bachelor, 50% amount, on account of his
personal expenses, is required to be deducted, had he been
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
155 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
alive. Thus, his monthly income comes to Rs.4,200/
(Rs.8,400/ minus Rs.4,200/).
328. Learned Tribunal has applied the multiplier of
‘18’, which is the appropriate multiplier to be applied, in the
present case. Thus, the loss of contribution comes to
Rs.4,200/x12 x 18 = Rs.9,07,200/.
329. The learned Tribunal has awarded a sum of
Rs.15,000/ on account of loss of estate, Rs.15,000/ on
account of funeral expenses and Rs.40,000/, on account of
consortium. The said findings, as per the mandate of the
Hon’ble Supreme Court in ’s case supra,
Pranay Sethi
require no interference by this Court, however, in view of the
law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in s
Nanu Ram’
case supra , each claimant is entitled to the amount of
compensation under the head ‘loss of consortium’.
330. Learned Tribunal has given the increase of 10%
on the amount awarded under the head ‘loss of estate’,
‘consortium’ and ‘funeral charges’. The said findings of the
learned Tribunal require interference, as the accident had
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
156 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
taken place in the year 2014 and the judgment in
Pranay
s case supra, was delivered in the year 2017.
Sethi’
331. Thus, the entitlement of the petitioners, is
adjudicated, as under:
1. Loss of income = Rs.9,07,200/
2. Loss of consortium = Rs.80,000/
(Rs.40,000 x 2)
3. Loss of estate = Rs.15,000/
4. Funeral Expenses = Rs.15,000/
________________________________________________________
Total = Rs.10,17,200/.
________________________________________________________
332. So far as the rate of interest is concerned, the
said findings require no interference by this Court.
333. Consequently, the present appeal is partly
allowed, and the awarded amount is reduced from
Rs.11,49,160/ to Rs.10,17,200/, with interest @ 7.5% per
annum. The award passed by the learned Tribunal is
modified accordingly.
FAO (MV) No.63 of 2026
334. The instant appeal has been preferred by the
Insurance Company against the award dated 12.11.2025,
passed by the learned Tribunal, in MAC No. 13 of 2014,
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
157 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
titled as ‘Kaushlya Devi & Others versus Sunil Kumar &
Others’, whereby, a sum of Rs.13,25,160/, along with
interest, at the rate of 7.5% per annum, has been awarded to
the petitionersclaimants, from the date of filing of the
petition, till the date of deposit of the amount. The ultimate
liability to pay the amount of compensation has been
fastened upon the Insurance Company.
335. The petitionersclaimants, being mother,
grandfather, widow and brothers of Sanju Kumar, who
expired, in the accident, in question, involving the offending
vehicle, have filed the above noted petition, before the
learned Tribunal, seeking compensation of Rs.50,00,000/.
336. Initially, the grandmother of the deceased, were
also impleaded as petitioner No.4, but, on account of her
death, her name was ordered to be deleted vide order dated
11.06.2025.
337. As per the claimants, Shri Sanju Kumar, had
sustained fatal injuries, in the accident, in question, and at
the time of death, his age has been pleaded to be 31 years.
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
158 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
According to the claimants, he was selfemployed. His
earnings have been pleaded Rs.30,000/, per month.
338. The petitioners, in order to prove the income of
Shri Sanju Kumar, as Rs.30,000/, have examined petitioner
No.1 Smt. Kaushalya, who has deposed that her son was
running a photo studio, at Kandrour and was earning
Rs.35,000/ per month. In addition to this, they have also
examined PW5, Pradeep Kumar, who has deposed that
Sanju Kumar, was earning 2530 thousand rupees per
month.
339. Learned Tribunal has taken the age of Shri Sanju
Kumar, as 31 years, on the basis of copy of Pariwar Register
Ex.P3. The said findings, being based upon the
documentary evidence, require no interference by this Court.
340. Learned Tribunal has taken the earnings of Shri
Sanju Kumar, as Rs.5,100/, per month, on the basis of
minimum wages, paid to the unskilled worker. The said
findings are required to be interfered with. The oral evidence
of petitioner No.1 demonstrates the fact that her son was
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
159 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
photographer, which does not fall within the definition of
unskilled worker. As such, his income can be said to be
Rs.8,000/, per month.
341. The learned Tribunal has rightly given 40%
increase, towards future prospects. The said findings
require no interference by this Court, as per the mandate of
Hon’ble Supreme Court, in ’s case supra.
Pranay Sethi
342. Admittedly, Sanju Kumar was working in
unorganized sector and his age is proved to be 31 years, as
such, in view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme
Court in Pranay Sethi ’s case supra, 40% increase is
required to be given, towards future prospects. Thus, by
adding 40% of his monthly income, the same comes to
Rs.11,200/ (Rs.8,000/ + Rs.3,200/).
343. Out of the said amount, in view of the law laid
down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Sarla Verma’s case
th
supra, and keeping in view the number of dependents, ¼
amount, on account of his personal expenses, is required to
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
160 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
be deducted, had he been alive. Thus, his monthly income
comes to Rs.8,400/ (Rs.11,200/ minus Rs.2,800/).
344. Learned Tribunal has applied the multiplier of
‘16’, which is the appropriate multiplier to be applied, in the
present case. Thus, the loss of contribution comes to
Rs.8,400/x12 x 16 = Rs.16,12,800/.
345. The learned Tribunal has awarded a sum of
Rs.15,000/ on account of loss of estate, Rs.15,000/ on
account of funeral expenses and Rs.40,000/, on account of
consortium. The said findings, as per the mandate of the
Hon’ble Supreme Court in ’s case supra,
Pranay Sethi
require no interference by this Court, however, in view of the
law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in s
Nanu Ram’
case supra , each claimant is entitled to the amount of
compensation under the head ‘loss of consortium’.
346. Learned Tribunal has given the increase of 10%
on the amount awarded under the head ‘loss of estate’,
‘consortium’ and ‘funeral charges’. The said findings of the
learned Tribunal require interference, as the accident had
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
161 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
taken place in the year 2014 and the judgment in
Pranay
s case supra, was delivered in the year 2017.
Sethi’
347. Thus, the entitlement of the petitioners, is
adjudicated, as under:
1. Loss of income = Rs.16,12,800/
2. Loss of consortium = Rs.2,00,000/
(Rs.40,000 x 5)
3. Loss of estate = Rs.15,000/
4. Funeral Expenses = Rs.15,000/
________________________________________________________
Total = Rs.18,42,800/.
________________________________________________________
348. So far as the rate of interest is concerned, the
said findings require no interference by this Court.
349. Consequently, the present appeal is disposed of.
The awarded amount is enhanced from Rs.13,25,160/ to
Rs.18,42,800/, with interest @ 7.5% per annum. The
award passed by the learned Tribunal is modified
accordingly.
FAO (MV) No.64 of 2026
350. The instant appeal has been preferred by the
Insurance Company against the award dated 12.11.2025,
passed by the learned Tribunal, in MAC No.11 of 2014, titled
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
162 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
as ‘Soma Devi & Others versus Sunil Kumar @ Sonu &
Others’, whereby, a sum of Rs.13,65,680/, along with
interest, at the rate of 7.5% per annum, has been awarded to
the petitionersclaimants, from the date of filing of the
petition, till the date of deposit of the amount. The ultimate
liability to pay the amount of compensation has been
fastened upon the Insurance Company.
351. The petitionersclaimants, being parents, sister
and brother of Sapna Kumari, who expired, in the accident,
in question, involving the offending vehicle, have filed the
above noted petition, before the learned Tribunal, seeking
compensation of Rs.50,00,000/.
352. As per the claimants, Ms. Sapna Kumari had
sustained fatal injuries, in the accident, in question, and at
the time of death, her age has been pleaded to be 21 years.
According to the claimants, she was pursuing MCA from
PTU Centre Bilaspur. In the column of ‘monthly income of
the person dead’, word ‘Nil’ has been mentioned.
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
163 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
353. Learned Tribunal has taken the age of Ms. Sapna
Kumari, as 21 years, on the basis of documents annexed
with the petition. The said findings, being based upon the
documentary evidence, require no interference by this Court.
354. The learned Tribunal has taken the earnings of
Ms. Sapna Kumari, as Rs.5,100/ per month, on the basis of
the minimum wages, paid to the unskilled worker. The said
findings are not sustainable in the eyes of law, as, the
Hon’ble Supreme Court in Shishu Pal’s case supra, has
held that the value of the domestic care of a homemaker is
liable to be taken as Rs.30,000/ per month.
355. Since, the accident, in question, had taken place
in the year 2014, as such, this Court is of the view that in
the light of the mandate of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in
Shishu Pal ’s judgment supra, ends of justice would be met,
if the contribution of Ms. Sapna Kumari, towards her family
during her lifetime is taken as Rs.10,000/ per month.
356. The learned Tribunal has given 40% increase,
towards future prospects. The said findings are not required
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
164 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
to be interfered with, by this Court, as per the mandate of
Hon’ble Supreme Court, in Pranay Sethi ’s case supra.
357. Admittedly, Ms. Sapna Kumari was working in
unorganized sector and her age is below 40 years, as such,
in view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court
in Pranay Sethi ’s case supra, 40% increase is required to
be given, towards future prospects. Thus, by adding 40% of
his monthly income, the same comes to Rs.14,000/
(Rs.10,000/ + Rs.4,000/).
358. Out of the said amount, in view of the law laid
down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Sarla Verma’s case
supra, and keeping in view the fact that the deceased was
bachelor, 50% amount, on account of her personal expenses,
is required to be deducted, had she been alive. Thus, her
monthly income comes to Rs.7,000/ (Rs.14,000/ minus
Rs.7,000/).
359. Learned Tribunal has applied the multiplier of
‘18’, which is the appropriate multiplier to be applied, in the
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
165 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
present case. Thus, the loss of contribution comes to
Rs.7,000/x12 x 18 = Rs.15,12,000/.
360. The learned Tribunal has awarded a sum of
Rs.15,000/ on account of ‘funeral expenses’, Rs.15,000/,
on account of ‘loss of estate’ and Rs.40,000/, towards
consortium. The said findings, as per the mandate of the
Hon’ble Supreme Court in Pranay Sethi ’s case supra,
require no interference by this Court.
361. Learned Tribunal has given the increase of 10%
on the amount awarded under the head ‘loss of estate’,
‘consortium’ and ‘funeral charges’. The said findings of the
learned Tribunal require interference, as the accident had
taken place in the year 2014 and the judgment in
Pranay
Sethi’ s case supra, was delivered in the year 2017.
362. Thus, the entitlement of the petitioners, is
adjudicated, as under:
1. Loss of income = Rs.15,12,000/
2. Loss of consortium = Rs.1,60,000/
(Rs.40,000 x 4)
3. Loss of estate = Rs.15,000/
4. Funeral Expenses = Rs.15,000/
________________________________________________________
Total = Rs.17,02,000/.
________________________________________________________
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
166 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
363. So far as the rate of interest is concerned, the
said findings are not required to be interfered by this Court.
364. Consequently, the present appeal is disposed of
and the awarded amount is enhanced from Rs.13,65,680/
to Rs.17,02,000/, with interest @ 7.5% per annum. The
award passed by the learned Tribunal is modified
accordingly.
FAO (MV) No.65 of 2026
365. The instant appeal has been preferred by the
Insurance Company against the award dated 12.11.2025,
passed by the learned Tribunal, in MAC No.12 of 2014, titled
as ‘Vidya Devi & Others versus Sunil Kumar @ Sonu &
Others’, whereby, a sum of Rs.18,78,528/, along with
interest, at the rate of 7.5% per annum, has been awarded to
the petitionersclaimants, from the date of filing of the
petition, till the date of deposit of the amount. The ultimate
liability to pay the amount of compensation has been
fastened upon the Insurance Company.
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
167 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
366. The petitionersclaimants, being parents and
brother of Meena Kumari, who expired, in the accident, in
question, involving the offending vehicle, have filed the above
noted petition, before the learned Tribunal, seeking
compensation of Rs.50,00,000/.
367. As per the claimants, Ms. Meena Kumari had
sustained fatal injuries, in the accident, in question, and at
the time of death, her age has been pleaded to be 25 years of
age. According to the claimants, she was Computer Teacher
in Shree Education Centre for Development of Advance
Computing, House No.1920, Raura Sector Bilaspur. Her
monthly income has been pleaded as Rs.25,000/.
368. Learned Tribunal has taken the age of Ms. Meena
Kumari, as 25 years, on the basis of copy of Pariwar Register
Ex.P3. The said findings, being based upon the
documentary evidence, require no interference by this Court.
369. In order to prove the earnings of Ms. Meena
Kumari, petitioners have examined PW5 Manohar Lal, who,
on the basis of the record, deposed that Ms. Meena Kumari,
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
168 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
was working as Computer Teacher and getting Rs.8,500/
per month. In this regard, he has proved the certificate
Ex.PW5/A.
370. The learned Tribunal has taken the earnings of
Ms. Sapna Kumari, as Rs.8,500/ per month, on the basis of
the certificate Ex. PW5/A. The said findings are not
sustainable in the eyes of law, as, the Hon’ble Supreme
Court in Shishu Pal’s case supra, has held that the value of
the domestic care of a homemaker is liable to be taken as
Rs.30,000/ per month.
371. Since, the accident, in question, had taken place
in the year 2014, as such, this Court is of the view that in
the light of the mandate of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in
Shishu Pal ’s judgment supra, ends of justice would be met,
if the contribution of Ms. Meena Kumari, towards her family
during her lifetime is taken as Rs.8500/+4000/ (on
account of multifarious activities done by a female in the
house hold) Rs.12,500/ per month.
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
169 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
372. The learned Tribunal has given 40% increase,
towards future prospects. The said findings are not
sustainable in the eyes of law, in view of the mandate of
Hon’ble Supreme Court, in Pranay Sethi ’s case supra.
373. Admittedly, Ms. Meena Kumari was working in
organized sector and her age is below 40 years, as such, in
view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in
’s case supra, 50% increase is required to be
Pranay Sethi
given, towards future prospects. Thus, by adding 50% of his
monthly income, the same comes to Rs.18,750/
(Rs.12,500/ + Rs.6,250/).
374. Learned Tribunal has also fallen in an error in
rd
deducting 1/3 amount, on account of her personal
expenses, which is in violation of the directions of the
Hon’ble Supreme Court in case supra,
Sarla Verma’s
wherein, it has been held that in the case of bachelor, 50%
amount, is required to be deducted on account of personal
expenses, had he/she been alive. Thus, her monthly income
comes to Rs.9,375/ (Rs.18,750/ minus Rs.9,375/).
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
170 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
375. Learned Tribunal has applied the multiplier of
‘18’, which is the appropriate multiplier to be applied, in the
present case. Thus, the loss of contribution comes to
Rs.9,375/x12 x 18 = Rs.20,25,000/.
376. The learned Tribunal has awarded a sum of
Rs.15,000/ on account of ‘funeral expenses’, Rs.15,000/,
on account of ‘loss of estate’ and Rs.40,000/, towards
consortium. The said findings, as per the mandate of the
Hon’ble Supreme Court in ’s case supra,
Pranay Sethi
require no interference by this Court.
377. Learned Tribunal has given the increase of 10%
on the amount awarded under the head ‘loss of estate’,
‘consortium’ and ‘funeral charges’. The said findings of the
learned Tribunal require interference, as the accident had
taken place in the year 2014 and the judgment in Pranay
Sethi’ s case supra, was delivered in the year 2017.
378. Thus, the entitlement of the petitioners, is
adjudicated, as under:
1. Loss of income = Rs.16,20,000/
2. Loss of consortium = Rs.1,20,000/
(Rs.40,000 x 3)
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
171 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
3. Loss of estate = Rs.15,000/
4. Funeral Expenses = Rs.15,000/
________________________________________________________
Total = Rs.21,75,000/.
________________________________________________________
379. So far as the rate of interest is concerned, the
said findings are not required to be interfered with, by this
Court.
380. Consequently, the present appeal is disposed of,
and the awarded amount is enhanced from Rs.18,78,528/
to Rs.21,75,000/, with interest @ 7.5% per annum. The
award passed by the learned Tribunal is modified
accordingly.
FAO (MV) No.66 of 2026
381. The instant appeal has been preferred by the
Insurance Company against the award dated 12.11.2025,
passed by the learned Tribunal, in MAC No.1 of 2015, titled
as ‘Phoolan Devi & Others versus Sunil Kumar @ Sonu &
Others’, whereby, a sum of Rs.11,93,160/, along with
interest, at the rate of 7.5% per annum, has been awarded to
the petitionersclaimants, from the date of filing of the
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
172 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
petition, till the date of deposit of the amount. The ultimate
liability to pay the amount of compensation has been
fastened upon the Insurance Company.
382. The petitionersclaimants, being parents and
brother of Anupama Kumari, who expired, in the accident, in
question, involving the offending vehicle, have filed the above
noted petition, before the learned Tribunal, seeking
compensation of Rs.50,00,000/.
383. As per the claimants, Ms. Anupama Kumari had
sustained fatal injuries, in the accident, in question, and at
the time of death, her age has been pleaded to be 21 years of
age. According to the claimants, she was Veterinary
Pharmacist. Her income has been pleaded to Rs.20,000/
per month.
384. Learned Tribunal has taken the age of Ms.
Anupama Kumari, as 23 years, on the basis of matriculation
examination certificate Ex.P7. The said findings, being
based upon the documentary evidence, require no
interference by this Court.
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
173 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
385. The learned Tribunal has taken the earnings of
Ms. Anupama Kumari, as Rs.5,100/ per month, on the
basis of the minimum wages, paid to the unskilled worker.
The said findings are not sustainable in the eyes of law, as,
the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case supra, has
Shishu Pal’s
held that the value of the domestic care of a homemaker is
liable to be taken as Rs.30,000/ per month.
386. Since, the accident, in question, had taken place
in the year 2014, as such, this Court is of the view that in
the light of the mandate of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in
’s judgment supra, ends of justice would be met,
Shishu Pal
if the contribution of Ms. Anupama Kumari, towards her
family during her lifetime is taken as Rs.10,000/ per
month.
387. The learned Tribunal has given 40% increase,
towards future prospects. The said findings are not required
to be interfered with, by this Court, as per the mandate of
Hon’ble Supreme Court, in ’s case supra.
Pranay Sethi
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
174 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
388. Admittedly, Ms. Anupama Kumari was working
in unorganized sector and her age is below 40 years, as
such, in view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme
Court in Pranay Sethi ’s case supra, 40% increase is
required to be given, towards future prospects. Thus, by
adding 40% of his monthly income, the same comes to
Rs.14,000/ (Rs.10,000/ + Rs.4,000/).
389. Out of the said amount, in view of the law laid
down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Sarla Verma’s case
supra, and keeping in view the fact that the deceased was
bachelor, 50% amount, on account of her personal expenses,
is required to be deducted, had she been alive. Thus, her
monthly income comes to Rs.7,000/ (Rs.14,000/ minus
Rs.7,000/).
390. Learned Tribunal has applied the multiplier of
‘18’, which is the appropriate multiplier to be applied, in the
present case. Thus, the loss of contribution comes to
Rs.7,000/x12 x 18 = Rs.15,12,000/.
391. The learned Tribunal has awarded a sum of
Rs.15,000/ on account of ‘funeral expenses’, Rs.15,000/,
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
175 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
on account of ‘loss of estate’ and Rs.40,000/, towards
consortium. The said findings, as per the mandate of the
Hon’ble Supreme Court in ’s case supra,
Pranay Sethi
require no interference by this Court.
392. Learned Tribunal has given the increase of 10%
on the amount awarded under the head ‘loss of estate’,
‘consortium’ and ‘funeral charges’. The said findings of the
learned Tribunal require interference, as the accident had
taken place in the year 2014 and the judgment in Pranay
Sethi’ s case supra, was delivered in the year 2017.
393. Thus, the entitlement of the petitioners, is
adjudicated, as under:
1. Loss of income = Rs.15,12,000/
2. Loss of consortium = Rs.1,20,000/
(Rs.40,000 x 3)
3. Loss of estate = Rs.15,000/
4. Funeral Expenses = Rs.15,000/
________________________________________________________
Total = Rs.16,62,000/.
________________________________________________________
394. So far as the rate of interest is concerned, the
said findings are not required to be interfered with, by this
Court.
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
176 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
395. Consequently, the present appeal is disposed of.
The awarded amount is enhanced from Rs.11,93,160/ to
Rs.16,62,000/, with interest @ 7.5% per annum. The
award passed by the learned Tribunal is modified
accordingly.
CATEGORYII
FAO (MV) No.319 of 2018
396. In view of the order passed in FAO(MV) No. 552 of
2016, the present appeal is dismissed.
FAO (MV) No.320 of 2018
397. In view of the order passed in FAO(MV) No. 555 of
2016, the present appeal is allowed.
FAO (MV) No.321 of 2018
398. In view of the order passed in FAO(MV) No. 558 of
2016, the present appeal is allowed.
FAO (MV) No.322 of 2018
399. In view of the order passed in FAO(MV) No. 551 of
2016, the present appeal is dismissed.
FAO (MV) No.363 of 2018
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
177 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
400. In view of the order passed in FAO(MV) No. 567 of
2016, the present appeal is dismissed.
FAO (MV) No.364 of 2018
401. In view of the order passed in FAO(MV) No. 568 of
2016, the present appeal is dismissed.
FAO (MV) No.508 of 2018
402. In view of the order passed in FAO(MV) No. 553 of
2016, the present appeal is dismissed.
FAO (MV) No.578 of 2018
403. In view of the order passed in FAO(MV) No. 538 of
2018, the present appeal is partly allowed.
FAO (MV) No.65 of 2019
404. In view of the order passed in FAO(MV) No. 539 of
2018, the present appeal is dismissed.
FAO (MV) No.128 of 2026
405. In view of the order passed in FAO(MV) No. 550 of
2016, the present appeal is dismissed.
406. Parties are left to bear their own costs.
407. Memo of costs be prepared accordingly.
408. Record be sent back.
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS
178 2026:HHC:45888
High Court of H.P.
409. Keeping in view the voluminous nature of this
judgment, the Registry is directed to place the relevant
portion of this judgment, from para1 to para71 in each file
and thereafter, to, extract and place only the relevant
excerpts, pertaining to the particular appeal, on the file of
the corresponding appeal, in all the connected matters.
(Virender Singh)
Judge
th
16 October, 2026
( ps )
::: Downloaded on - 16/10/2026 14:42:13 :::CIS