IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH (207)

FAO-4407-2018 Date of decision:- 18.04.2026 Preeti and others ...Appellants Versus Mahinder and another ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS BAHL Present: Mr. Ajay K. Yadav, Advocate for Mr. R.N. Lohan, Advocate, for the appellants.

Mr. Lalit Garg, Advocate, (Through VC), and Mr. Punit Jain, Advocate for respondent No.2-insurance company.

****

VIKAS BAHL, J. (ORAL)

1. Widow, two minor children and parents of the deceased- Mahabir @ Bintu have filed the present appeal for enhancement. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jind, vide award dated 19.08.2017 had awarded an amount of Rs.4,70,300/- along with interest to the appellants as compensation on account of death of the said Mahabir @ Bintu, which had taken place in an accident that had occurred on 11.05.2012.

2. Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that the present appellants/claimants had filed a claim petition under Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter to be referred as “the 1988 Act”) and in paras No.9 and 10 of the award passed by the Tribunal, it was observed that the accident had taken placed on account of involvement of the offending motorcycle and since the claim petition has been filed under Section 163A of the 1988 Act, there was no need to prove rash and negligent driving. It is further submitted that the provisions of Section 163A of the 1988 Act have now been replaced with Section 164 of the 1988 Act and thus, the claimants are entitled to an amount of compensation of Rs.5,00,000/-. It is submitted that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of “Ram Murti and others Vs. Punjab State Electricity Board, reported as 2023 ACJ 631, in similar facts and circumstances, was pleased to grant compensation of an amount of Rs.5,00,000/- in a case where the negligence of the driver of the offending vehicle was not proved. In the said case also, although the accident had taken place on 23.05.1991 and the award in the said case was passed on 12.04.1994, yet the Hon'ble Supreme Court had given the benefit of the beneficial provisions of Section 164 of the 1988 Act, which provision had been incorporated by the Act 32 of 2019. It is submitted that in view of the same, the said amount be paid along with interest to the claimants from the date of the application till the date of the actual payment. It is submitted that the present case be treated as a case under Section 164 of the 1988 Act as amended. It is further submitted that even the offending motorcycle was owned by respondent No.1 and was insured by respondent No.2/insurance company.

3. Learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2-insurance company, on the other hand, has submitted that the amount which has been awarded by the Tribunal is adequate and no further compensation is required to be awarded to the appellants.

4. This Court has heard learned counsel for the parties and has perused the paper book.

5. This Court in case bearing No.FAO-247-1991 titled as “Sushma Devi and others Vs. Tarlochan Singh and others” decided on 03.09.2024 while considering the case of no fault liability had, by placing reliance upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Ram Murti and others (Supra), directed the Insurance Company to pay an amount of Rs.5,00,000/- to the claimants along with the interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of filing the claim petition till its actual payment. Relevant portion of the said judgment passed in the case of Sushma Devi and others (Supra) is reproduced hereinbelow:-

“6. Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, which was in force on the date of the accident i.e. 04.12.1989 provided that the compensation to the extent of Rs.25,000/- would be payable in the case of death of a person and in such a situation, the claimant was not required to plead and establish that the death or permanent disablement in respect of which the claim had been made was due to any wrongful act, negligence or d