Compensation in motor accident claims must be just and reasonable, based on evidence of income and established legal formulas for future prospects and multipliers, and should not be treated as a windfall or source of profit.

NIDHI GUPTA, J.

CM-5157-CII-2025

Prayer in this application filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act is for condonation of delay of 92 days in filing the accompanying appeal.

2. Heard.

3. For the reasons mentioned in the application which is duly supported by an afÏdavit of the applicant/appellant No.2, the same is allowed and delay of 92 days in filing the appeal is condoned.

The present appeal has been filed by the claimants seeking enhancement of compensation of Rs.14,20,500/- awarded by the learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Hisar (hereinafter referred to as “the learned Tribunal”) vide Award dated 04.09.2024 passed in MACP Case No. 231 dated 11.05.2023 filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”). The 2 claimants are the 45-year-old widow; and 26-year-old son of the deceased Surender Singh, who was 48 years old at the time of accident.

2. Brief facts of the case are that the learned Tribunal on the basis of pleadings and evidence adduced before it concluded that the deceased- Surender Singh had died due to the injuries suffered by him in a motor vehicular accident that took place on 21.01.2023 due to the rash and negligent driving of a Tralla bearing registration No. RJ-36GA/5857 (hereinafter “the offending vehicle”) being driven by respondent No.1; owned by respondent No.2; and insured by respondent No.3. The above said compensation was awarded along with interest @ 6% per annum. All the respondents were held jointly and severally liable to pay the amount of compensation.

3. Learned counsel for the appellants seeks enhancement of compensation by submitÝng that income of the deceased has been taken on the lower side. It is submitted that as per the relevant Minimum Wage Notification dated 28.08.2023 minimum wage payable to an unskilled worker is Rs.10,532/- per month. In support, learned counsel for the appellants has produced said Notification in Court today, which is taken on record.

4. It is further submitted that learned Tribunal has wrongly applied future prospects @ 25%; whereas the same should have been 40%; deduction towards personal expenses should have been 1/4th; multiplier should have been 14; inadequate compensation has been granted under the non-pecuniary side. Interest is also on lower side and the same should be 9% p.a. It is accordingly prayed that the present Appeal be allowed; and compensation of Rs.1 Crore be awarded on account of death of Surender Singh.

5. No other argument is raised on behalf of learned counsel for the appellants. I have heard learned counsel and perused the case file in detail. I find no merit in the submissions advanced on behalf of the appellants.

6. Perusal of the record of the case shows that it was the pleaded case of the appellants before the learned Tribunal that deceased was an agriculturist and was doing dairy farming from which he was earning Rs.30,000/- p.m. However, as the appellants had failed to produce any document of the said alleged avocation or income, learned Tribunal had assessed income of the deceased as Rs.10,000/- p.m. on the basis of Minimum wages payable to an unskilled labourer at the relevant time. Reliance of the appellants upon the above said Notification dated 28.08.2023 is misplaced as the said Notification is applicable only w.e.f. 01.07.2023; whereas the date of accident is 21.01.2023. Co