SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(P&H) 6059

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Sudeepti Sharma, J
Ram Kumar – Appellant
Versus
Amritpal Singh – Respondent
FAO-3371-2021 (O&M)



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Deepak Sharma
For the Respondents: Jagdeep Singh Chahal

In motor accident claims for unorganized sector workers, notional income and dependency must be realistically assessed based on social status, and legal representatives are entitled to filial consortium in addition to standard compensation heads.

Headnote:(A) Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - S. 166 - Death in motor accident - Assessment of compensation - Notional income - Consideration of social and economic background for unorganized sector - Tribunal's income assessment considered low and reassessed to Rs.15,000/- per month - Deduction for personal expenses for bachelor set at 50% - Future prospects at 40% applied properly - Entitlement of legal representatives to loss of consortium reaffirmed.

Facts of the case:
The appeal was filed seeking enhancement of compensation for the death of the deceased, aged 33, who worked as an auto-rickshaw driver. The Tribunal had awarded a lower sum, ignoring actual earning potential and specific categories of consortium.

Findings of Court:
The Court reassessed the income, adjusted the deduction for personal expenses to 1/2, included loss of consortium for legal representatives, and enhanced the total compensation to Rs.21,26,000/-, ordering payment with 9% interest.

Issues: The primary issue was the determination of appropriate monthly income, the correct percentage for personal expense deduction, and the entitlement of legal representatives to filial consortium.

Ratio Decidendi: In cases of unorganized sector workers, notional income should correlate with social and economic status; for bachelors, personal expense deduction should be 50%, and legal representatives (parents/siblings) are entitled to loss of consortium as per benevolent legislative intent.

Result: Appeal allowed; compensation enhanced.

Table of Content
1. overview of the appeal against tribunal compensation award. (Para 1 , 2)
2. summary of rival contentions regarding quantum of compensation. (Para 3 , 4)
3. application of established compensation assessment laws (sarla verma, pranay sethi). (Para 6 , 7 , 8)
4. principles for determining notional income for workers in unorganised sectors. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15)
5. legal requirements for deduction of personal expenses and entitlement to loss of consortium. (Para 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21)
6. final calculation of enhanced compensation and directions for payment. (Para 23 , 24 , 25 , 26)

****

SUDEEPTI SHARMA J.

1. The present appeal has been preferred against the award dated 04.02.2020 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, S.A.S. Nagar (Mohali) in the claim petition filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short, 'the Tribunal’) for enhancement of compensation granted to the claimants to the tune of Rs.7,02,000/- along with interest @ 9 % per annum, on account of death of Sanjeev Kumar in a Motor Vehicular Accident, occurred on 13.06.2017.

2. As sole issue for determination in the present appeal is confined to quantum of compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal, a detailed narration of the facts of the case is not required to be reproduced here for the sake of brevity.

SUBMISSIONS OF LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE PARTIES

3. The learned counsel for the claimants-appellants contends that the amount assessed by the learned Tribunal is on the lower side and deserves to be enhanced. Therefore, he prays that the present appeal be allowed and amount of compensation be enhanced as per latest law.

4. Per contra, learned counsel for respondents No.1 and 2, however, vehemently argues that the award has rightly been passed and the amount of compensation, as assessed by the learned Tribunal has rightly been granted. Therefore, they pray for dismissal of the appeal.

5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the whole record of this case with their able assistance.

SETTLED LAW ON COMPENSATION

6. Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sarla Verma Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and Another [(2009) 6 Supreme Court Cases 121], laid down the law on assessment of compensation and the relevant paras of the same are as under:-

“30. Though in some cases the deduction to be made towards personal and living expenses is calculated on the basis of units indicated in Trilok Chandra, the general practice is to apply standardised deductions. Having a considered several subsequent decisions of this Court, we are of the view that where the deceased was married, the deduction towards personal and living expenses of the deceased, should be one-third (1/3rd) where the number of dependent family members is 2 to 3, one-fourth (1/4th) where the number of dependent family members is 4 to 6, and one-fifth (1/5th) where the number of dependent family members exceeds six.

31. Where the deceased was a bachelor and the claimants are the parents, the deduction follows a different principle. In regard to bachelors, normally, 50% is deducted as personal and living expenses, because it is assumed that a bachelor would tend to spend more on himself. Even otherwise, there is also the possibility of his getting married in a short time, in which event the contribution to the parent(s) and siblings is likely to be cut drastically. Further, subject to evidence to the contrary, the father is likely to have his own income and will not be considered as a dependant and the mother alone will be considered as a dependant. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, brothers and sisters will not be considered as dependants, because they will either be independent and earning, or married, or be dependent on the father.

32. Thus even if the deceased is survived by parents and siblings, only d the mother would be considered to be a dependant, and 50% would be treated as the personal and living expenses of the

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top