IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO-6561-2025 (O&M)

Date of Decision: 18.02.2026 DIKSHA RANI AND OTHERS ......... Appellants Versus MUKESH AND OTHERS ..... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHVIR SINGH RATHOR Present : Mr. K.K. Goyal, Advocate with Mr. S.S.Kalra, Advocate and Mr. A.S. Sidhu, Advocate for the appellants.

****

YASHVIR SINGH RATHOR , J. (Oral)

CM-23293-CII-2025 Application is for condonation of delay of 70 days in filing the appeal.

Keeping in view the averments made in the application, the application is allowed and delay is condoned.

CM stands disposed of.

CM-23294-CII-2025 Application is for condonation of delay of 200 days in re-

filing the appeal.

Keeping in view the averments made in the application, the application is allowed and delay is condoned.

CM stands disposed of.

1. This appeal is directed against the Award dated 07.10.2024 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Karnal (for short ‘Tribunal’) for enhancement of compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal in respect of the death of Amit in a motor vehicular accident on account of rash and negligent driving of offending vehicle bearing No. HR-13F-1618, being driven by respondent No.1, owned by respondent No.2 and insured with respondent No.3. The claimants are the wife, parents and two minor children of the deceased.

2. Learned Tribunal, after going through the material placed on record, has assessed the compensation amount as under:- Sr. Particulars Amount No.

1. Income Rs.15,954/-

2. Future Prospectus (40%) Rs.6,381/- (Rs.2,01,015)

3. Deductions (1/4th as personal Rs.67,005/- (deducted) (remaining amount expenses) Rs.2,01,015/- annually)

4. Multiplier 17 (Rs.2,01,015 X 17=Rs.34,17,255/-)

5. Loss of Estate Rs.18,150/- 6. Funeral Expenses Rs.18,150/- 7. Litigation Expenses Rs.10,000/-

8. Loss of Parental Consortium Rs.48,400X2=Rs.96,800/- 9. Loss of Filial Consortium Rs.48,400X2=Rs.96,800/-

10. Loss of Spousal Consortium Rs.48,400/-

Total Rs.37,05,555/-

3. I have heard learned counsel for the appellants and have gone through the material placed on the file.

4. Learned counsel for the appellants argued that the Tribunal has not correctly assessed the income of the deceased. Infact, the deceased was earning Rs.35,000/- per month while working at Kalpana Chawla Government Medical College & Hospital, Karnal (Haryana) on contract basis and in the light of the evidence led on file, his income should have been assessed on higher side. Learned counsel further contended that the total compensation awarded is also on lower side. The interest has been awarded @ 6% per annum on the compensation amount, whereas in the latest pronouncements of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, interest is being awarded @ 9% per annum and he prayed that the award in hand is liable to be set aside.

5. However, there is no force in the contentions raised by learned counsel for the appellants that the compensation has been assessed on lower side. The claimants alleged that the deceased was getting a salary of Rs.35,000/- per month while working as a contractual employee with Kalpana Chawla Government Medical College & Hospital, Karnal (Haryana). However, the record was summoned from the said hospital and as per his salary slip, he was getting a monthly salary of Rs.15,954/-. As such, the Tribunal rightly assessed his monthly income to be Rs.15,954/-. Thereafter, 40% future prospects have been added as he was 30 years of age. The deceased has left behind five dependents and 1/4th of the income was deducted towards personal expenses in accordance with the law laid down in 2009 (6) SCC 121 titled ‘Smt. Sarla Verma and others vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and another’ and 2017 (16) SCC 680 titled ‘National Insurance Company vs. Pranay Sethi and others’. Taking his age to be 30 years, multiplier of 17 has rightly been applied. Adequate compensation has also been awarded for loss of estate, funeral expenses, litigation expenses and consortium to all the claimants @ Rs.48,400/- each