##PAGE1##

FAO-3040-2025 (O&M) (cid:1)

Sr. No.130 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH

FAO-3040-2025 (O&M)

Date of decision: 01st April 2026

THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. .....…Appellant

versus

NISHA AND OTHERS ........Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HARPREET KAUR JEEWAN

Present: Mr. Krishna Kant, Advocate for the appellant.

Ms. Babita Gupta, Advocate for respondents No.1 to 3.

Mr. Parmender Singh, Advocate for Mr. Pawan Kumar Kait, Advocate

for respondents No.4 and 5.

HARPREET KAUR JEEWAN, J. (ORAL)

1. The appellant-Insurance Company has filed the present appeal assailing the correctness of the Award dated 07.02.2025, passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Chandigarh (for short “the Tribunal”), whereby, the claimants/respondents No.1 to 3 have been awarded a sum of Rs.55,68,672/- as compensation along with 7.5% interest

per annum.

2. For the sake of brevity, the facts are not reproduced since the

challenge in the present appeal is only to the quantum of compensation.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant-Insurance Company contends that the Tribunal has wrongly treated the gross income of the deceased as Rs.3,65,124/- per annum by relying upon the Income Tax Return for the

SIMRANDEEP KAUR 2026.04.10 16:24 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

FAO-3040-2025 (O&M) (cid:2)

Assessment Year 2017-18 (Ex.P-10). The wife of the deceased is a young lady and she is in a position to run the dhaba, which was earlier run by the deceased, as such, in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in “Sushma H.R. and Another vs. Deepak Kumar Jha and Others”; 2023

ACJ 331, the loss of income should have been considered as 50%.

4. It is further contended that in the case of Sushma H.R. (supra) the deceased was running a Bakery and the appellants relied upon the income tax returns. The Hon’ble Apex Court observed that the Bakery can be run by the appellants in the same manner as it was being run by the

deceased. The observations by the Hon’ble Apex Court are as under:-

“xxxxxx

6. On this aspect it is true that there is no material on record to indicate that the Bakery business which was being run during the life time of the deceased has been closed after his death. Even if that aspect of the matter is kept in view, there is also no contrary material on record to indicate that the appellants herein who is a young lady and minor son are well versed in Bakery business. In that light keeping in view the young age of the appellants without experience, it cannot be expected that the Bakery can be run by them in the same manner as it was being run by the deceased nor is there

definite evidence on record in this regard.

xxxxxx”

5. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents-claimants contends that the income of the deceased has been rightly assessed by the Tribunal by relying on the income tax returns. It is further contended that the deceased was a young man of 35 years of age. He was not the owner of the dhaba situated in the Judicial Courts Complex, Panchkula but he was just running the same. It is further contended that as per general practice, such

SIMRANDEEP KAUR 2026.04.10 16:24 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

FAO-3040-2025 (O&M) (cid:3)

dhabas are put to auction every year. The wife of the deceased is a housewife and she cannot run the dhaba. As such, the Tribunal has rightly assessed 100% loss of income by relying upon the income tax returns of the

deceased.

6. I have considered the aforesaid contentions and perused the

paper book.

7. There is no contradictory evidence on record that the deceased was not the owner of the dhaba, which was being run by him. It is not disputed that the deceased was an income tax assessee and he has filed income tax returns much prior to the date of his death. The accident took place in January, 2022. The income tax returns, much prior to the date of accident, have been proved on record as Ex.P-6 to Ex.P-10, including that of the Assessment Ye