IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH

Reserved on:- 12.12.2025

Pronounced on:- 18.12.2025 Uploaded on :- 19.12.2025

SMT. AARTI & ORS. ......Appellants

vs.

SANDEEP KUMAR AND ORS ......Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA

Present: Mr. Ajit Sihag, Advocate for the appellants.

Mr. Atul Arya, Advocate for respondent No.2.

Mr. Nitin Gupta, Advocate for respondent No.3.

****

SUDEEPTI SHARMA J.

CM-5528-CII-2020

1. This is an application filed under Section 151 of Code of Civil

Procedure, 1908 for condonation of delay of 8 days in re-filing the appeal.

2. Notice in the application.

3. On asking of the Court, Mr. Atul Arya, Advocate accepts notice on behalf of respondent No.2 and Mr. Nitin Gupta, Advocate accepts notice on behalf of respondent No.3 and contends that they have no objection if the

application is allowed.

4. For the reasons mentioned in the application for condonation of

delay which is supported by an affidavit, the application is allowed. 5. The delay of 8 days in refiling the appeal is condoned.

CM-5529-CII-2020

6. This is an application filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act,

1963 for condonation of delay of 14 days in filing the appeal.

7. Learned counsel for the appellant contends that appellant would not ask for interest for the delayed period.

8. Notice in the application.

9. On asking of the Court, Mr. Atul Arya, Advocate accepts notice on behalf of respondent No.2 and Mr. Nitin Gupta, Advocate accepts notice on behalf of respondent No.3 and contends that they have no objection if the application is allowed.

10. For the reasons mentioned in the application for condonation of delay which is supported by an affidavit, the application is allowed.

11. The delay of 14 days in filing the appeal is condoned.

FAO-1869-2020

12. The present appeal has been preferred against the award dated 21.08.2019 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bhiwani in the claim petition filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short, 'the Tribunal’) for enhancement of compensation granted to the claimants to the tune of Rs.17,83,600/- along with interest @ 7% per annum, on account of death of Sukhbir in a Motor Vehicular Accident, occurred on

05.02.2017.

13. As sole issue for determination in the present appeal is confined to quantum of compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal, a detailed narration of the facts of the case is not required to be reproduced here for the sake of brevity.

SUBMISSIONS OF LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE PARTIES

14. The learned counsel for the claimants-appellants contends that the amount assessed by the learned Tribunal is on the lower side and deserves to be enhanced. Therefore, he prays that the present appeal be allowed and amount of compensation be enhanced as per latest law.

15. Per contra, learned counsel for respondents, however, vehemently argues that the award has rightly been passed and the amount of compensation, as assessed by the learned Tribunal has rightly been granted.

Therefore, he prays for dismissal of the appeal.

16. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the whole record of this case with their able assistance.

SETTLED LAW ON COMPENSATION

17. Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sarla Verma Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and Another [(2009) 6 Supreme Court Cases 121] laid down the law on assessment of compensation and the relevant paras of the same are 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 standardised deductions. Having a 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 one-third (1/3rd) where the number of dependent family members is 2 to 3, one-fourth (1/4th) where the number of dependent family members is 4 to 6, and one-fifth (1/5th) where the numbe