IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
(O&M) SMT. SABESH AND OTHERS – Appellant
Versus
RAJENDER SINGH AND OTHERS – Respondent
##PAGE1##
(cid:1)(cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6)(cid:7)(cid:6)(cid:8)(cid:5)(cid:6)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:10) (cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:11)(cid:7)(cid:12)(cid:1)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
FAO-2126-2004
Date of decision: 05.03.2026
Smt. Sabesh and others ...Appellants
Versus
Rajender Singh and others ...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA
Present: Mr. P.R. Yadav, Advocate for the appellants.
Mr. Sandeep Suri, Advocate
for respondent No.3-Insurance Company.
****
DEEPAK GUPTA, J. (ORAL)
It is an appeal filed by the claimants seeking enhancement of
the compensa2on awarded by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal.
2. The brief facts necessary for disposal of the present appeal are
that in a motor vehicular accident, which occurred on 11.06.1999,
Mahender lost his life due to the rash and negligent driving of Bus No. HR-
47-1464. The widow, two minor children and the parents of the deceased
filed a claim pe22on under the Motor Vehicles Act seeking compensa2on
from the driver, owner and insurer of the offending vehicle. Upon
apprecia2on of the pleadings and evidence on record, the learned Tribunal
vide award dated 09.06.2003 allowed the claim pe22on and awarded
compensa2on of ₹3,12,400/- along with interest, holding the driver, owner
and insurer of the offending vehicle jointly and severally liable to pay the
said amount.
3. The claimants have preferred the present appeal seeking
enhancement of the compensa2on. Learned counsel for the appellants
submits that the income of the deceased has been assessed on the lower
1 of 5
::: Downloaded on - 09-03-2026 20:31:49 :::
##PAGE2##(cid:1)(cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6)(cid:7)(cid:6)(cid:8)(cid:5)(cid:6)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:10) (cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:11)(cid:6)(cid:12)(cid:1)
side by the Tribunal. It is argued that since there were five dependents of
the deceased, the deduc2on towards personal expenses ought to have
been one-fourth instead of the deduc2on applied by the Tribunal. It is
further contended that no addi2on towards future prospects has been
made while calcula2ng the loss of dependency and that the compensa2on
awarded under the conven2onal heads is also inadequate. Learned counsel
further submits that the deceased was working as a driver and was earning
₹2,500/- per month as salary and was also contribu2ng towards agricultural
work, thereby earning a total sum of ₹6,500/- per month. However, the
Tribunal has taken into considera2on only ₹2,100/- per month as the
income of the deceased.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the insurance company does
not seriously dispute that the compensa2on is liable to be reassessed in
accordance with the principles laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in
Na(cid:3)onal Insurance Company Limited v. Pranay Sethi and others, 2017(4)
RCR (Civil) 1009; Sarla Verma and others v. Delhi Transport Corpora(cid:3)on
and another, (2009) 6 SCC 121; and Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. v.
Nanu Ram alias Chuhru Ram and others, 2018 (4) RCR (Civil) 333.
However, it is submiAed that the Tribunal has assessed the income of the
deceased on the basis of the evidence available on record and therefore
the same should not be substan2ally interfered with.
5. Having heard learned counsel for the par2es and aBer perusing
the record, this Court finds that the widow of the deceased, Smt. Sabesh,
appeared as a witness and deposed that her husband Mahender was about
28 years of age and was working as a driver by profession. According to her
tes2mony, he used to drive the truck belonging to Mamraj and was
receiving a salary of ₹2,500/- per month. This version is duly corroborated
2 of 5
::: Downloaded on - 09-03-2026 20:31:49 :::
##PAGE3##(cid:1)(cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6)(cid:7)(cid:6)(cid:8)(cid:5)(cid:6)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:10) (cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:11)(cid:13)(cid:12)(cid:1)
by PW4 Mamraj, the owner of the truck. Merely because PW4 was not
maintaining any wriAen record regarding payment of salary cannot be a
ground to discard his tes2mony, par2cularl
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.