IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No. 165 of 2003 (O&M)

RESERVED ON:- 06.04.2026 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 08.04.2026 UPLOADED ON:- 08.04.2026 PARAMJIT KAUR AND OTHERS ......APPELLANTS Vs.

ROSHAN SINGH AND OTHERS .........RESPONDENTS FAO No. 166 of 2003 (O&M)

JAIPAL KAUR AND OTHERS ......APPELLANTS Vs.

ROSHAN SINGH AND OTHERS .........RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMARINDER SINGH GREWAL Present: Mr. Shourya Arora, Advocate, for the appellants (in both appeals).

Ms. Madhu Sharma, Advocate, for respondent No. 3-insurance company (in both appeals).

*****

AMARINDER SINGH GREWAL, J.

1. This order shall dispose of two appeals, i.e., FAO-165-2003 and FAO- 166-2003, challenging the same Award dated 25.07.2002, whereby a sum of

1,75,000/- was granted on account of the death of Mohinder Singh, and a sum of

2,00,000/- was granted on account of the death of Paramjit Khan.

PRAYER

2. The present FAO(s) have been filed by the appellants–claimants seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Patiala (hereinafter referred to as “the Tribunal”), arising out of the same accident caused due to rash and negligent driving of respondent No.1. For the sake of convenience, the facts are being taken from FAO-165-2003 titled as ‘Paramjit Kaur and Others vs. Roshan Singh and Others’.

FACTS

3. Succinctly, the facts of the case are that on 28.12.2000 at about 7:15 p.m., the deceased Mohinder Singh and Paramjit Khan were proceeding on their respective bicycles from the Ambala side towards village Surajgarh. When they reached near the bridge in the area of village Mehtabgarh, a truck bearing registration No. HR-37-4289 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘offending vehicle’), driven by respondent No.1 in a rash and negligent manner, came from behind and struck against their bicycles. The truck thereafter turned turtle and fell upon both the deceased, as a result of which they sustained fatal injuries and died at the spot. An FIR was registered with regard to the said accident. The appellants–claimants, being the family members of the deceased, filed claim petitions under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act. On 25.07.2002, vide the impugned Award passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Patiala, the claimants were held entitled ₹ ₹

to compensation of 1,75,000/- in FAO No. 165 of 2003 and 2,00,000/- in FAO No. 166 of 2003. The claimants, being dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal, have preferred the present appeals seeking enhancement.

ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANTS

4. Learned counsel for the appellants has contended that the compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal is inadequate and liable to be enhanced. It is submitted that the learned Tribunal, despite holding the accident to be the result of rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle, has awarded compensation on a very low side by not properly appreciating the evidence on record regarding the income of the deceased Mohinder Singh, who was stated to be working as a mechanic and engaged in dairy business and agriculture.

4.1 It is further contended that the income has been wrongly assessed at a very meagre amount and the dependency has been correspondingly reduced. Furthermore, it is contended that the multiplier applied by the learned Tribunal is on the lower side considering the age of the deceased, and that no adequate amount has been awarded under the conventional heads such as loss of estate and loss of consortium. Additionally, it is submitted that the amount awarded towards last rites is also inadequate and the rate of interest granted is on the lower side. On these grounds, enhancement of compensation is prayed for.

4.2 Learned counsel for the appellants has also contended that the learned Tribunal has failed to properly appreciate the evidence led by the claimants with regard to the income of the deceased Paramjit Khan, who was stated to be an agriculturist and also