IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

243 Date of decision: 20.01.2026 FAO-5389-2019(O&M)

United India Insurance Company Limited ...Appellant(s)

Vs.

Sudesh & Others ...Respondent(s)

***

CORAM: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Present:- Mr. Sahej Mahajan, Advocate for the appellant.

Mr. Yashdeep Nain, Advocate for respondents/claimants (through VC).

***

NIDHI GUPTA, J.

Present appeal has been filed by Insurance Company laying challenge to the Award dated 06.04.2019 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Hisar (hereinafter ‘the learned Tribunal’) whereby compensation of Rs.29,62,515/- has been awarded to the claimants/respondents No.1 to 5 herein. The 5 claimants are the 38-year-old widow, 18-year-old son, 16- year-old son, 70-year-old mother and 77-year-old father of deceased Devender, who was 40 years old at the time of accident.

2. Learned counsel for the claimants submits that Cross- Objections have been filed by the claimants seeking enhancement of compensation of Rs.29,62,515/- awarded by the learned Tribunal vide Award dated 06.04.2019 passed in MACT Case No.90 dated 13.07.2018 filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act. For the sake of facility, the parties are being referred to as per their status in the appeal.

3. Brief facts of the case are that the ld. Tribunal on the basis of pleadings and evidence adduced by the parties, concluded that deceased Devender had died due to the injuries suffered by him in a motor vehicular accident that took place on 09.04.2018 due to the rash and negligent driving of truck bearing registration No.HR-39D-9881 (hereinafter “the offending vehicle”) being driven by respondent No.6, owned by respondent No.7 and insured by the appellant. The said compensation has been awarded along with interest @ 9% per annum. Respondents were held jointly and severally liable for payment of compensation amount.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant/Insurance Company assails the impugned Award by submitting that income of the deceased has been assessed on the higher side as RS.14,711/- per month on the basis of DC rates. It is submitted that it was the pleaded case of the claimants before the learned Tribunal that deceased was working as a Supervisor and was also an agriculturist and was earning Rs.34,000/- per month. However, as the claimants were unable to prove the alleged avocation and income of the deceased, learned Tribunal has taken income of the deceased as Rs.14,711/- per month. However, the said income was assessed on the basis of DC rates, which is not permissible as per law. It is contended that the learned Tribunal ought to have assessed income of the deceased as per the Minimum Wage Notification. It is submitted that as per the relevant Notification in the year 2018, even a skilled worker was admissible to minimum wage of only Rs.9,900/- per month; whereas learned Tribunal has assessed income as Rs.14,711/- per month. It is submitted that therefore, income of the deceased ought to be decreased and Award be modified. It is further submitted that the learned Tribunal has awarded an exorbitant amount of Rs.4,80,000/- under the conventional heads. It is submitted that the said amount also deserves to be modified as per law.

5. Per contra, learned counsel for the claimants/cross-objectors vehemently opposes the submissions on behalf of the appellant/Insurance Company and submits that in fact, compensation deserves to be enhanced as claimants are entitled to increase of 10% every three years, on the amounts awarded under the conventional heads. It is submitted that the amount of Rs.2,50,000/- awarded to the claimants towards loss of love and affection is liable to be adjusted towards 10% increase to be granted to the claimants in terms of law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court.

6. No other argument is made on behalf of the parties. I have heard learned counsel and perused the case file in detail. I find no merit in the submissions advanced on behalf of the claimants. However, there is