IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ****

Date of Decision.:20.02.2026 Parmeet Kaur and Others …..Appellants Vs.

Gurpreet Singh and Another .….Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA Present:- Mr. Manish Giri, Advocate for the appellants.

****

DEEPAK GUPTA, J. (ORAL)

CM-23750-CII-2025:

This is an applica(cid:27)on under Sec(cid:27)on 5 of the Limita(cid:27)on Act to condone the delay of 70 days in filing the appeal.

For the reasons men(cid:27)oned in the applica(cid:27)on duly supported by affidavit of Parmeet Kaur, one of the appellants, delay of 70 days in filing the appeal is hereby condoned.

Applica(cid:27)on stands disposed of accordingly.

CM-23749-CII-2025:

This is an applica(cid:27)on under Sec(cid:27)on 5 of the Limita(cid:27)on Act to condone the delay of 8 days in re-filing the appeal.

For the reasons men(cid:27)oned in the applica(cid:27)on duly supported by affidavit of Anoop Singh, Clerk of Manish Giri, Advocate, delay of 8 days in re-filing the appeal is hereby condoned. Applica(cid:27)on stands disposed of accordingly.

Main case.:

The claimants are before this Court in the present appeal assailing the award dated 15.04.2025 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, S.A.S. Nagar, Mohali, limited to the quantum of compensa(cid:27)on.

2. The claim pe(cid:27)(cid:27)on under Sec(cid:27)on 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 arose out of the death of Paramjit Singh in a motor vehicular accident dated 29.05.2024 caused due to rash and negligent driving of car bearing registra(cid:27)on No. PB-01D-9402. The claimants, being the widow and two minor children of the deceased, sought compensa(cid:27)on from the driver- cum-owner and insurer of the offending vehicle. The learned Tribunal, a:er returning findings on negligence and liability, assessed the total compensa(cid:27)on at ₹34,07,100/- and held the respondents jointly and severally liable to pay the same along with interest.

3. The primary grievance of the appellants is that the income of the deceased has been assessed on the lower side. It has been argued that the deceased was an interna(cid:27)onal Kabaddi player earning approximately ₹30,00,000/- per annum from tournaments and was also earning ₹10,000/- per month from agriculture, but the tribunal has assumed the earnings of the diseased to be ₹ 18,000/- per month only on no(cid:27)onal basis.

4. However, learned counsel fairly conceded that no Income Tax Returns, bank statements, contracts, tournament remunera(cid:27)on records or other documentary evidence were produced to substan(cid:27)ate the alleged earnings.

5. The Tribunal has elaborately considered the evidence on record. The widow of the deceased (PW-1) deposed regarding the par(cid:27)cipa(cid:27)on of the deceased in Kabaddi tournaments and the prizes allegedly received by him, while PW-2, Chairman of the Kabaddi Baidwan Sports Academy, supported the asser(cid:27)on that the deceased was a Kabaddi player and produced a cer(cid:27)ficate along with electronic material. The passport and travel documents demonstrated that the deceased had traveled abroad on certain occasions. Nevertheless, the Tribunal rightly observed that such material did not establish the purpose of travel or quan(cid:27)fy the income derived from Kabaddi tournaments. The electronic recordings and social media material only indicated that the deceased was a Kabaddi player but did not furnish a reliable basis for determina(cid:27)on of income. Even PW-2 admiGed inability to produce any document evidencing the earnings of the deceased.

6. It is seGled that though proceedings under the Motor Vehicles Act are summary in nature and strict rules of evidence are relaxed, the assessment of income must s(cid:27)ll be founded upon reasonable and credible material. Where a claimant asserts a substan(cid:27)ally high income, the burden lies upon him to place at least some dependable evidence to support such asser(cid:27)on. In the absence of proof of actual earnings, the