##PAGE1##

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

****

FAO-3086-2002 (O&M)

Date of decision: 21.04.2026

Sita and another . . . . Appellant

Vs.

Baljinder Singh and others . . . . Respondents

****

CORAM: HON’BLE MR JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA

****

Present: - Mr. S.K. Sandhir, Advocate, for the appellants.

Mr. Aman Sharma, Advocate, for respondent No.2.

None for respondent No.3.

****

DEEPAK GUPTA, J.

The present appeal has been preferred by the claimants seeking

modification of the award dated 28.07.2001 passed by the learned Motor

Accident Claims Tribunal, Ludhiana, limited to the quantum of compensation

awarded.

2. At the outset, it is not in dispute between the parties that a motor

vehicular accident occurred on 04.12.1998, resulting in the untimely demise of

Mukesh Kumar, aged about 24 years. The deceased was employed as a worker

with Adinath Textiles Limited. The accident was found to have been caused due

to rash and negligent driving of a Punjab Roadways bus bearing registration No.

PB-11L-7904. It is also an admitted position that the offending vehicle was

uninsured. The claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act,

1988 was filed by the widow and minor son of the deceased, and the learned

Tribunal awarded a sum of ₹2,52,000/- along with interest, fastening liability

upon the driver and owner of the offending vehicle.

3. The grievance of the appellants is confined to the inadequacy of

the compensation so awarded. Learned counsel for the appellants has

contended that the learned Tribunal failed to apply the correct multiplier

having regard to the age of the deceased and further erred in not granting any

VIVEK PAHWA

2026.04.22 14:43

I agree to specified portions of

this document

Chandigarh

FAO-3086-2002 2026:PHHC:060341

(cid:1)

addition towards future prospects. It is also urged that the amounts awarded

under conventional heads are on the lower side. However, the income of the

deceased assessed at ₹1,800/- per month has not been disputed.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent-owner has not

been able to controvert the submission that the compensation requires re-

determination in light of the principles laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme

Court in Smt. Sarla Verma and others v. Delhi Transport Corporation and

another, 2009 (6) SCC 121, National Insurance Company Limited v. Pranay

Sethi and others, 2017 AIR SC 5157, Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. v.

Nanu Ram @ Chuhru Ram and others, AIRONLINE 2018 SC 1249.

5. Having considered the rival submissions and the settled legal

position, this Court finds merit in the appeal to the extent of re-computation of

compensation.

6. Since the age of the deceased at the time of accident was 24 years,

the appropriate multiplier, in terms of the ratio laid down in Sarla Verma

(supra), would be 18 and not 15 as applied by the Tribunal. Further, in view of

Pranay Sethi (supra), an addition of 40% towards future prospects is warranted

as the deceased was below 40 years of age and was in a fixed income category.

7. Accordingly, the compensation is re-assessed as under:

 Monthly income: ₹1,800/-

 Annual income: ₹21,600/-

 Addition of 40% towards future prospects: ₹8,640/-

 Total annual income: ₹30,240/-

8. Since the number of dependents is two, deduction of 1/3rd

towards personal and living expenses is justified in terms of Sarla Verma

(supra). Thus, the annual loss of dependency comes to ₹20,160/-.

9. Applying the multiplier of 18, the total loss of dependency is

assessed at ₹3,62,880/-.

VIVEK PAHWA

2026.04.22 14:43

I agree to specified portions of

this document

Chandigarh

FAO-3086-2002 2026:PHHC:060341

(cid:1)

10. As regards compensation under conventional heads, although

reliance has been placed on Magma General Insurance (supra), it is to be

borne in mind that the accident in question occurred in the year 1998.

Therefore, the conventional figures presently standardized cannot be

mechanically applied retrospectively at their enhanced scale. A balanced

approach is required.

11. Accordingly, compensation is awarded as follo