IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Reserved on: 11.12.2025 Pronounced on: 15.12.2025 Uploaded on: 15.12.2025

1. FAO No.2979 of 2002 (O&M)

KANWAR PREET SINGH AND OTHERS … APPELLANTS VERSUS PUNJAB STATE AND ANOTHER … RESPONDENTS AND

2. FAO No. 2980 of 2002 (O&M)

KANWAR PREET SINGH AND OTHERS … APPELLANTS VERSUS PUNJAB STATE AND ANOTHER … RESPONDENTS AND

3. FAO No. 2981 of 2002 (O&M)

JUGAL MAHAJAN AND OTHERS … APPELLANTS VERSUS PUNJAB STATE AND ANOTHER … RESPONDENTS AND MOHAN LAL MAHAJAN AND OTHERS … APPELLANTS VERSUS PUNJAB STATE AND ANOTHER … RESPONDENTS AND

5. FAO No. 2983 of 2002 (O&M)

RATTAN KAUR AND OTHERS … APPELLANTS VERSUS PUNJAB STATE AND ANOTHER … RESPONDENTS AND

6. FAO No. 2984 of 2002 (O&M)

JUGAL MAHAJAN AND OTHERS … APPELLANTS VERSUS PUNJAB STATE AND ANOTHER … RESPONDENTS AND

7. FAO No. 2985 of 2002 (O&M)

SAROJ RANI AND OTHERS … APPELLANTS VERSUS PUNJAB STATE AND ANOTHER … RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VIRINDER AGGARWAL Present: Mr. Ekta Thakur, Advocate with Mr. Shikha, Advocate and Mr. Sakshi, Advocate for the Appellants in all the FAOs.

Mr. I.S.Kingra, Senior DAG, Punjab.

*****

VIRINDER AGGARWAL,J.

1. These seven appeals arise out of a common award dated 08.02.2002 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Chandigarh, in several claim Petitions. By the impugned award, the learned Tribunal disposed of multiple claim petitions filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, awarding compensation to the claimants for deaths sustained in a motor vehicular accident. Feeling aggrieved by the quantum of compensation awarded, which the appellants contend is inadequate and is not in consonance with settled principles, the claimants have preferred these appeals seeking enhancement of the compensation. Since all appeals stem from the same accident and common award, they are being disposed of by this common judgment.

BACKGROUND FACTS

2. The facts leading to the present appeals, in brief, are that on 14.05.2000, a road accident occurred due to right front tyre burst of Punjab Roadways bus bearing registration No. PB-02-S-9914 driven rashly and negligently by the Rohan Lal driver which was carrying the deceased persons and fell into Sirhind Canal from bridge near Head Works, Ropar. As a result of the accident, several passengers washed away in stormy water and died. The appellants, being the legal heirs/dependants of the deceased filed separate claim petitions before the learned Tribunal seeking compensation on account of loss of life, dependency, medical expenses, pain and suffering, and other heads. The respondents, including the driver, owner, and insurer of the offending vehicle were arrayed as parties. It was alleged that the accident was caused solely due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle. The learned Tribunal, after appreciating the material on record, passed the common award dated

08.02.2002.

3. The learned Tribunal, vide its award dated 08.02.2002, held that the accident occurred due to the sole negligence of the driver of the offending bus. On the aspect of quantum, the learned Tribunal assessed the compensation under various heads, including loss of dependency (applying a multiplier based on the age and income of the deceased), funeral expenses, loss of consortium. The learned Tribunal in each petition awarded compensation amounts to claimants along with interest at the rate of 9% per from the date of filing the petitions till realization. The liability was fastened on the respondents to indemnify the award amount.

CONTENTIONS

4. Learned counsel for the appellants argued that the compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal is grossly inadequate and inconsistent with the settled principles for determining just compensation. It was submitted that the learned Tribunal failed to grant amounts under the essential conventional heads, made no addition towards future prospects, and wrong deduction towards personal expenses in the circumstances of the case. It was t