IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CM-4432-CII-2020 IN/AND NISHA AND OTHERS …..Appellants Vs.

NITIN BANSAL AND ANOTHER …..Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA Present: Mr. Sikandh Mehta, Advocate for Mr. Pankaj Bali, Advocate for the appellants.

Mr. Sunil Polist, Advocate for respondent No.1. None for respondent No.2/Insurance Company.

*****

HARKESH MANUJA, J.

CM-4432-CII-2020 Prayer in this application is for condonation of delay in filing the appeal.

Notice of the application was issued on 11.09.2025, but till date, no reply has been filed on behalf of the respondents, however, learned counsel for the respondent(s) vehemently opposes the prayer made in the application and prays for dismissal of the application.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the contents of the application, the applicant makes out sufficient cause for condoning the delay.

Accordingly, application is allowed and delay of 496 days in filing the appeal is condoned.

Main case

1. By way of present appeal, challenge has been laid to an award dated 29.05.2018 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kaithal (for brevity, “the Tribunal”), whereby an amount of Rs. 13,69,382/- was awarded as compensation to the appellants/claimants along with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of institution of claim petition till its realization on account of death of Deepak in a motor vehicular accident, occurred on 13.09.2017.

FACTS

2. A claim petition came to be filed at the instance of appellants/claimants before the learned Tribunal, praying for grant of compensation to the tune of Rs. 50,00,000/- (Rupees fifty lakhs only), on account of death of Deepak in a motor vehicular accident which took place on 13.09.2017 while alleging rash and negligent driving of respondent No.1/driver.

3. After going through the pleadings and evaluating the evidence led by both the parties, learned Tribunal arrived at a conclusion that the accident occurred on account of rash and negligent driving of respondent No. 1/driver, holding respondent No. 2/Insurance Company liable and awarded compensation in the following manner:-

S.No. Nature Amount (in Rs.)

1. Annual Income of deceased Rs. 99,000/- 2. Future Prospects (25%) Rs. 24,750/-

3. Total Income (Rs. 99,000 + Rs. 24,750) Rs. 1,23,750/-

4. Deduction (1/4^th) Rs. 30,937/- 5. Net Income (Rs. 1,23,750 – Rs. 30,937) Rs. 92,813/-

6. Multiplier (14) (Rs. 92,813 x 14) Rs. 12,99,382/-

7. Loss of Estate Rs. 15,000/- 8. Funeral Expenses Rs. 15,000/- 9. Loss of Consortium Rs. 40,000/-

Total Compensation Rs. 13,69,382/-

4. Being aggrieved of the award dated 29.05.2018 passed by the learned Tribunal, the present appeal was preferred by the appellants/claimants for enhancement of compensation. Facts, as specified in the claim petition, about the manner of the accident and the issue regarding negligence of the driver recorded in favour of the appellants/claimants by the learned Tribunal, being not under challenge, are not being repeated here for the sake of brevity.

ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE APPELLANTS/CLAIMANTS.

5. Learned counsel for the appellants/claimants submitted that the impugned award dated 29.05.2018 passed by the learned Tribunal suffers from grave illegality, material irregularity and erroneous appreciation of evidence insofar as the assessment of compensation is concerned. It was submitted that the learned Tribunal wrongly assessed the income of the deceased @ Rs. 8,250/- per month instead of Rs. 20,000/- per month as duly established on record. Furthermore, it was submitted that the deduction of 1/4^th towards personal and living expenses was also on the higher side besides the amount of compensation granted under conventional heads being not in consonance with the settled law, therefore, he prayed for enhancement of compensation as per latest decision on the subject.

ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF LEARNED COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENT NO.2/INSURANCE COMPANY.

6. Per contra, learned coun