146 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision : 29.01.2026 FAO No.6091 of 2025 (O&M)

GURBINDER SINGH ....Appellant Versus MANOJ KUMAR AND OTHERS ...Respondents FAO No.4421 of 2024 (O&M)

THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED ....Appellant Versus GURBINDER SINGH AND OTHERS ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ JAIN Present : Mr. Vansh Chawla, Advocate for the appellant in FAO-6091-2025 and for respondents No.1 & 2 in FAO-4421-2024.

Mr. Imran Ahmad, Advocate for the appellant in FAO-4421-2024 and for respondent No.3 in FAO-6091-2025.

PANKAJ JAIN, J. (ORAL)

CM-21598-CII-2025 in FAO-6091-2025 This is an application filed under Section 5 of Limitation Act seeking condonation of delay of 433 days in filing the instant appeal.

For the reasons recorded in the application, this Court is satisfied that the applicant/appellant has made out a sufficient cause for condonation of delay.

Consequently, the present application is allowed. The delay of

433 days in filing the instant appeal is hereby condoned.

CM No.16278-CII of 2024 in FAO-4421-2024 This is an application filed under Section 5 of Limitation Act seeking condonation of delay of 19 days in filing the instant appeal.

For the reasons recorded in the application, this Court is satisfied that the applicant/appellant has made out a sufficient cause for condonation of delay.

Consequently, the present application is allowed. The delay of

19 days in filing the instant appeal is hereby condoned.

Main Appeals These are cross-appeals directed against award passed by MACT, Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar, dated 10.05.2024 on claim petition filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 by the brother and sister/claimants seeking compensation on account of death of deceased Gurbhinder Singh, who died in a motor-vehicular accident, dated

26.12.2021.

2. Claimant is in appeal (FAO No.6091 of 2025) aggrieved of quantum of compensation.

3. The primary ground raised is that despite there being an evidence to prove that the deceased was working as Mason, he has been assessed as an unskilled labour. Reference is being made to the ocular evidence in form of statement of CW1, one of the claimants, Gurbinder Singh. The other grievance is w.r.t. denial of loss of consortium to sister Kuljit Kaur.

4. FAO No. 4421 of 2024 is at the behest of Insurance Company disputing the deduction made to calculate the dependency claiming that both the claimants i.e., brother and sister were not dependent upon the deceased. In the absence of there being any evidence, they ought not have been taken to be dependent upon the deceased.

5. Counsel for the appellant/Insurance Company further submits that the MACT has taken the income of the deceased as Rs.9907.68 per month and rounded it up to Rs.10,000/- per month which was not the minimum wages on the date of accident. Reliance is being placed upon minimum wages notified by State of Punjab vide Notification dated

11.10.2022 placed on record along with the appeal as Annexure A-1.

5.1. Counsel for the Insurance Company has also disputed compounding of the amount payable under the conventional heads and relies upon ratio of law laid down in the case of ‘Hasina Yasmin and others vs. National Insurance Co. Ltd. and another’, SLP(C) No.27285 of 2025, decided on 17.12.2025, to submit that the amount payable under the heads of loss of estate, loss of consortium and funeral expenses, need not be compounded.

6. I have heard counsel for the parties and have gone through records of the case.

7. From the testimony of CW1, it is evident that he specifically deposed regarding deceased working as a Mason. Not even a suggestion was put to him controverting the said fact.

8. In view thereof, this Court finds that the Tribunal erred in assessing the deceased as an unskilled labour. He was required to be assessed as a ‘skilled labour’. Accordingly, the income of the deceased is taken to be Rs.11,076.73/- per month. The same is rounded up to Rs.11,100/- per month.

9. So far