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) 82602

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. – Appellant
Versus
MANMOHAN SHARDA AND OTHERS – Respondent
FAO_2032_2026



##PAGE1##

FAO-2032-2026 (O&M)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH

(130/1) FAO-2032-2026(O&M)

Date of decision- 21.04.2026

(cid:1)

(cid:1)

The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. ...Appellant(cid:1)

Versus

Manmohan Sharda and Others ... Respondents(cid:1)

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMARINDER SINGH GREWAL

Present: Mr. Puneet Jain, Advocate (cid:1)

for the appellant-Insurance Company.(cid:1)

Ms. I.S. Kooner, Advocate,(cid:1)

for the respondent No.1-caveator.

(cid:1)

***

(cid:1)

AMARINDER SINGH GREWAL, J. (ORAL)

1. The present appeal has been filed by the appellant–Insurance

Company seeking to set aside the Award dated 18.10.2025 passed by the learned

Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Hoshiarpur (hereinafter referred to as ‘the

learned Tribunal’) whereby the claim petition filed by respondents No. 1, 2 and 3-

claimants on account of the death of Usha Sharda, wife of respondent No.1 in a

motor vehicular accident on 18.05.2024, has been allowed.

2. Learned counsel for the appellant–Insurance Company contends that

the learned Tribunal has erred in law and on facts while passing the impugned

award dated 18.10.2025, awarding an excessive compensation of Rs.16,90,200/-

with interest @ 7% per annum, as the monthly income of the deceased has been

SHUBHAM

2026.04.27 16:16 -1-

I am the author of this

document

##PAGE2##

FAO-2032-2026 (O&M)

arbitrarily assessed at Rs.12,250/- without considering the inconsistent salary

reflected in the record and ought to have been taken on an average basis. Further,

the learned Tribunal has wrongly adopted dual income parameters and ignored the

deposition relevant documents indicating lower earnings. Furthermore, the grant of

Rs.5,40,000/- towards household services is legally unsustainable as the deceased

was a full-time salaried employee, resulting in impermissible dual compensation.

Subsequently, it is contended that the learned Tribunal has erred in treating all

claimants as dependents, including the married daughter living separately, and

despite clear evidence that the husband and major son were financially

independent, has wrongly applied deduction of 1/3rd and multiplier method.

Consequently, the entire assessment is stated to be based on conjectures and

surmises, without proper deductions towards personal expenses, rendering the

impugned award excessive and liable to be modified/reduced. Reliance has been

placed on Sushila and Others v. Sudhakar and Another Civil Appeal No.4213 of

2026.

3. Per contra, learned counsel for respondent Nos.1, 2 and 3-claimants

submits that the award passed by the learned Tribunal does not suffer from any

irregularity or infirmity, and that the findings recorded therein are well-reasoned on

the basis of the material available before the learned Tribunal. It is accordingly

contended that no ground is made out for interference in appeals. Reliance has been

placed on Laxmidhar Nayak and others v. Jugal Kishore Behera and Others

2018 (1) SC 746 and Sunita v. Vinod Singh and Others

2025 INSC 366

4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and examined the record,

with their able assistance.

SHUBHAM

2026.04.27 16:16 -2-

I am the author of this

document

##PAGE3##

FAO-2032-2026 (O&M)

5. In view of the rival submissions, the following issues arise for

consideration before this Court:

(i) whether the grant of compensation towards household services, in addition to

the income of the deceased, amounts to impermissible double compensation; and

(ii) whether the claimants, namely the husband, a major earning son, and a

married daughter, could be treated as dependents for the purpose of computation

of compensation.

6. The contention of the appellant–Insurance Company that the grant of

compensation towards household services, in addition to the income of the

deceased, amounts to impermissible double compensation, does not merit

acceptance. The concept of “household services” is not confined merely to cases

where the deceased is a non-earning housewife; rather, it encompasses the

multifaceted contribution made by an individual towards the famil

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