Back
HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT
Vivek Singh Thakur, J.
Union of India and Anr. – Appellants.
versus
Kiran Bala and Ors. – Respondents.
FAO (MVA) No. 503 of 2015
Decided on 30.10.2025
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Appellants:Mr. Balram Sharma, Deputy Solicitor General of India with Mr. Rajiv Sharma, Advocate.
For the Respondents Nos. 1 to 4.:Mr.Vikas Rathore, Advocate,
For the Respondent No. 5 already ex parte vide
IMPORTANT POINT
Death in motor accident – MACT or Appellate Court(s) is/are within its/their jurisdiction to enhance compensation without prayer being made for same.
Headnote:
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 – Section 173 – Death in motor accident – Compensation of Rs.13,77,000/- alongwith 9% interest as well as cost of 5,000/- awarded by Tribunal – MACT or Appellate Court(s) is/are within its/their jurisdiction to enhance compensation without prayer being made for same – Grounds for assailing award are not sustainable, rather amount of compensation determined by MACT is on lower side and deserves to be enhanced – Keeping in view monthly salary from Government service and age of 36 years of deceased and number of dependents (four), only 1/4th should have been deducted towards personal expenses, and compensation has to be determined by adding 50% of future income as a future prospects and applying multiplier of 15, claimants shall be entitled for compensation of Rs.14,86,000/- alongwith 7.5% interest – Impugned award passed by MACT modified. (Paras 19, 23, 25, 26, 27 and 28)
Result: Appeal disposed of.
JUDGMENT
Vivek Singh Thakur, J.—This appeal has been preferred under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘MV Act’) against award dated 9.6.2015 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-III, Mandi, H.P. (for short MACT) in Claim Petition No. 52 of 2007, titled as Kiran Bala & others Vs. Commandant, 70 RCC (Gref) & others, whereby Claim Petition preferred by claimants/respondents has been allowed and appellants have been directed to pay compensation amounting to 13,77,000/- alongwith interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till payment of the compensation alongwith cost of Rs.5,000/.
2. Parties hereinafter shall be referred as per their status before the MACT, for convenience.
3. Claimant No. 1 Kiran Bala is wife of deceased Halku Ram, claimant No. 2 Chamari Devi is mother of deceased Halku Ram, whereas claimants No. 3 and 4 are minor children of deceased Halku Ram.
4. Respondent No. 1 is Incharge of vehicle No. 99E-61171 involved in the accident, whereas respondent No. 2 Lalit Kumar is driver of said vehicle. Respondent No. 3 is Union of India.
5. Brief facts of the case are that deceased Halku Ram was serving as Chowkidar in IPH Department Kelong, District Lauhal and Spiti, H.P. On 2.2.2007 at 4:00 P.M., he took lift in Tanker bearing No. 99E-61171 of the respondents from Tandi Trishe point towards Stingri. The aforesaid Tanker driven by driver respondent No. 2 Lalit Kumar, when reached near Villing Nallah, rolled down in the Nallah about 30 meters, causing multiple injuries on the whole body of Halku Ram. Halku Ram was shifted to Kelong Hospital for immediate treatment, wherefrom he was referred to Kullu and from Kullu to IGMC, Shimla where, on 6.2.2007, he succumbed to his injuries and postmortem (Ex. PW-1/C) of his dead body was conducted on 7.2.2007.
6. FIR No. 7/2007 (Ex. PW-1/B), dated 2.2.2007, with respect to accident in reference was registered in Police Station, Kelong under Sections 279, 337 and 304A IPC against respondent No. 2, driver.
7. Claimants preferred Claim Petition under Section 166 of the MV Act for awarding compensation, amounting to Rs.20,00,000/- for death of deceased Halku Ram on account of rash and negligent driving on the part of respondent No.2.
8. Respondents opposed the Claim Petition on the ground that deceased Halku Ram himself had given undertaking in an affidavit Mark- D on 3.2.2007 in presence of Hans Raj Kaushal, Junior Engineer, IPH Nargul Section and Mast Ram P&H department, which was attested by Executive Magistrate, Kelong, stating therein that he was traveling in the vehicle on his own will and neither he nor his family members would claim any compensation from the respondents.
9. It was further stand of the respondents that accident took place due to mechanical defect in the vehicle, the Claim Petition was filed on the basis of false manipulated facts, and deceased was not earning Rs.12,000/- per month.
10. After considering the pleadings and evidence placed on record, it was concluded by the MACT that death of Halku Ram has caused on account of rash and negligent driving on the part of respondent No. 2, and undertaking given by deceased Halku Ram was against the statute and thus was not sustainable and claimants had every right to file and maintain the Claim Petition.
11. MACT had determined the amount of compensation on the basis of monthly salary of Rs.6400/- as was being received by deceased Halku Ram from the Department, but without taking into consideration claim of additional income put forth by the claimants. Wife of deceased was also held entitled for Rs.1,00,000/- on account of loss of consortium, minor children were held entitled for Rs.1,00,000/- for loss of care and guidance, and Rs.25,000/- was awarded on account of funeral charges and as such claimants were held entitled to receive compensation of Rs.13,77,000/- to be paid by respondents jointly and severely alongwith interest @ 9% per annum thereon with cost
