Page 1 of 6

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

243

FAO-5333-2018 (O&M)

Date of decision: 16.02.2023

Roshni & Others

...Appellant(s)

Vs.

Hari Shanker & Others

...Respondent(s)

CORAM:

HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA

Present:-

Mr.Naresh Kaushik, Advocate for the appellants.

***

NIDHI GUPTA, J.

Present appeal has been filed by the claimants seeking

enhancement of compensation of Rs.16,36,000/- awarded by Motor

Accident Claims Tribunal, Jind (hereinafter referred to as “the learned

Tribunal”) vide Award dated 05.02.2018 passed in MACT Case No.43 of

2016 filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act (hereinafter

referred to as “the Act”). The claimants are widow and three major children

of deceased-Balwan Singh.

Learned Tribunal on the basis of pleadings and evidence

placed before it concluded that deceased-Balwan Singh had died due to the

injuries suffered by him in a motor vehicular accident that took place on

08.01.2016 due to rash and negligent driving of truck bearing registration

No.MP-09HH-1801 (hereinafter referred to as “the offending vehicle”)

being driven by respondent No.1/driver, owned by respondent No.2 and

insured by respondent No.3 herein. Learned Tribunal awarded

compensation as noted above along with interest @ 9% per annum from

SUNENA

2023.02.22 16:14

I attest to the accuracy and

integrity of this document

Page 2 of 6

the date of filing the petition till its actual realization. Respondents were

held jointly and severally liable to pay the aforesaid compensation amount.

Learned counsel for the appellants submits that

compensation awarded by learned Tribunal deserves to be enhanced as

nothing has been granted to the claimants by way of loss of income. It is

stated that at the time of death the deceased was drawing pension of Rs.

29,393/- per month, and appellant/claimant No.1 is now drawing family

pension and claimants are therefore, entitled to compensation under loss

of income.

It is submitted that the deceased was also earning

Rs.80,000/-per annum from agriculture, but this income of the deceased

has been discounted by the learned Tribunal.

It is further submitted that nothing has been granted on

account of future prospects, love and affection, and very meager amount

has been granted under other conventional heads to the claimants.

No other argument is raised on behalf of the appellants.

I have heard learned counsel for the appellants.

Admittedly, at the time of death, the deceased was 60

years old and drawing pension of Rs.29,393,/- as he was retired from

Agricultural Department as reflected in Exhibit P17 which is the statement

of account of the deceased. It is established position in law, that

agricultural income of the deceased if any, cannot be taken into account for

the purpose of assessing his income as, income from agricultural land will

continue for the claimants and therefore, they will suffer no loss of income

SUNENA

2023.02.22 16:14

I attest to the accuracy and

integrity of this document

Page 3 of 6

from agriculture. Accordingly, the learned Tribunal had taken income of the

deceased as Rs.29,000/-per month.

Learned Tribunal had made deduction of 50% towards

personal expenses as widow of the deceased was the only dependent. I

find no error in the reasoning of the learned Tribunal in holding the

appellant No.1 as the sole dependent of the deceased. In this regard,

reliance may be placed upon Para 15 of judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme

Court in Civil Appeal No.3483 of 2008 titled as “Sarla Verma & Others Vs.

Delhi Transport Corporation & Another” which is reproduced

hereinbelow:-

“15. Where the deceased was a bachelor and the

claimants are the parents, the deduction follows a different principle. In

regard to bachelors, normally, 50% is deducted as personal and living

expenses, because it is assumed that a bachelor would tend to spend

more on himself. Ev