IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH (109)

FAO-3190-2010 Date of decision:- 10.03.2026 Jasvir Kaur and others ...Appellants Versus Yadvinder Singh and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS BAHL Present: Ms. Arzoo Modi, Advocate, and Mr. Mohd. Yousaf, Advocate, for the appellants.

Ms. Vedika Puri, Advocate, for Mr. Nigam K. Bhardwaj, Advocate, for respondent No.3-Insurance Company.

****

VIKAS BAHL, J. (ORAL)

1. The widow, three children and mother of the deceased-Anup Singh have filed the present appeal for enhancement of compensation. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Patiala, vide award dated 20.01.2010 had awarded the compensation of Rs.7,29,500/- along with interest on account of death of Anup Singh, which took place in a motor vehicular accident. The only issue which arises for consideration in the present appeal is as to whether the present appellants are entitled to enhancement of compensation as other aspects have not been disputed before this Court.

2. Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that in the present case, the benefit of future prospects has not been taken into consideration by the Tribunal while assessing the total income and since the deceased was 40 years of age, thus, 25% of the income was required to be taken into consideration on account of the said future prospects. It is further submitted that on account of loss of estate, no amount has been paid and also on account of funeral expenses only an amount of Rs.2,000/- has been paid, which is a very meagre amount and on each of the said aspects, the appellants are entitled to Rs.18,100/-. It is stated that on account of loss of consortium, only an amount of Rs.5,000/- has been paid, whereas, there are five claimants and each of the said claimants should have been awarded an amount of Rs.48,400/-. It is submitted that thus, an additional compensation of Rs.4,51,200/- is to be paid to the appellants and interest @ 8% per annum be given. In support of her arguments, learned counsel for the appellants has relied upon the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in cases titled as Sarla Verma (Smt.) and others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and another reported as (2009) 6 SCC 121, National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi and others reported as (2017) 16 SCC 680, and Magma General Insurance Company Limited Vs. Nanu Ram alias Chuhru Ram and others reported as (2018) 18 SCC 130. The chart showing the details of the claim, as submitted by the learned counsel for the appellants, is reproduced herein below:-

“FAO NO.3190 of 2010 Appellant Herein: Claimant(s) – Jasvir Kaur & Others.

Date of Accident: - 28.12.2008 Nature of case: Death (Deceased Anoop Singh)

Age of deceased: 40 years DETAILS OF RELIEF GRANTED/CLAIMED Dated: 04/09/2025 (MOHD. YOUSAF & ARZOO MODI)

PH-5161/2021 ADVOCATES Name & Signature of Advocate with P.N.O.”

3. Learned counsel appearing for respondent No.3-Insurance Company, on the other hand, has submitted that the rate of interest which is sought to be claimed by the appellants is highly excessive and at best the interest that can be awarded on the additional compensation should be 6%

per annum.

4. This Court has considered the arguments raised on behalf of both the parties and has gone through the paper-book and also the chart produced by the learned counsel for the appellants and is of the opinion that the amount of enhancement claimed in the chart is in accordance with law and deserves to be approved, except the rate of interest and the total amount of enhanced compensation along with interest mentioned in the chart.

5. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Pranay Sethi’s case (Supra), has held as under:-

“59.In view of the aforesaid analysis, we proceed to record our conclusions:-

59.1 The two-Judge Bench in Santosh Devi should have been well advised to refer the matter to a larger Bench as it was taking a different view than what has been stated in Sarla Verma, a judgment by a coordinate Bench. It is becaus