Dalbir Singh And Another vs Makhan Singh And Another on 12 January, 2026

[Cites 8, Cited by 0]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Dalbir Singh And Another vs Makhan Singh And Another on 12 January, 2026

1. The present appeal has been preferred against the award dated 03.02.2020 passed in the claim petition filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (in short '1988 Act'), by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Hisar (in short 'the Tribunal') for enhancement of compensation, granted to the appellants/claimants to the tune of Rs.17,22,800/- along with interest @ 7% per annum on account of death of deceased Meenu @ Parveen in a Motor Vehicular Accident, occurred on 03.07.2016.

1 of 13 ::: Downloaded on - 14-01-2026 04:58:58 ::: FAO-2262-2021 -2-

2. As sole issue for determination in the present appeal is confined to quantum of compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal, a detailed narration of the facts of the case is not required to be reproduced and is skipped herein for the sake of brevity.

SUBMISSIONS OF LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE PARTIES

3. The learned counsel for the appellants/claimants contends that the compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal is on the lower side and deserves to be enhanced.

4. Therefore, he prays that the present appeal be allowed and the compensation awarded to the appellants/claimants be enhanced, as per latest law.

5. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent No.2, however, vehemently argues on the lines of the award and contends that the amount of compensation as assessed by Ld. Tribunal, has rightly been granted to the appellants/claimants. Therefore, he prays for dismissal of the present appeal.

6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the whole record of this case with their able assistance. SETTLED LAW ON COMPENSATION

7. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sarla Verma Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and Another [(2009) 6 Supreme Court Cases 121], laid down the law on assessment of compensation and the relevant paras of the same are as under:-

"30. Though in some cases the deduction to be made towards personal and living expenses is calculated on the basis of units indicated in Trilok Chandra, the general practice is to apply standardised deductions. Having a considered several 2 of 13 ::: Downloaded on - 14-01-2026 04:58:59 ::: FAO-2262-2021 -3- subsequent decisions of this Court, we are of the view that where the deceased was married, the deduction towards personal and living expenses of the deceased, should be one- third (1/3rd) where the number of dependent family members is 2 to 3, one-fourth (1/4th) where the number of dependent family members is 4 to 6, and one-fifth (1/5th) where the number of dependent family members exceeds six.

31. 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. Even otherwise, there is also the possibility of his getting married in a short time, in which event the contribution to the parent(s) and siblings is likely to be cut drastically. Further, subject to evidence to the contrary, the father is likely to have his own income and will not be considered as a dependant and the mother alone will be considered as a dependant. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, brothers and sisters will not be considered as dependants, because they will either be independent and earning, or married, or be dependent on the father.

32. Thus even if the deceased is survived by parents and siblings, only d the mother would be considered to be a dependant, and 50% would be treated as the personal and living expenses of the bachelor and 50% as the contribution to the family. However, where the family of the bachelor is large 3 of 13 ::: Downloaded on - 14-01-2026 04:58:59 ::: FAO-2262-2021 -4- and dependent on the income of the deceased, as in a case where he has a widowed mother and large number of younger non-earning sisters or brothers, his personal and living expenses may be restricted to one-third and contribution to the family will be taken as two-third.

* * * * * *

42. We therefore hold that the multiplier to be used should be as mentioned in Column (4) of the table above (prepared by applying Susamma Thomas³, Trilok Chandra and Charlie), which starts with an operative multiplier of 18 (for the age groups of 15 to 20 and 21 to 25 years), reduced by one unit for every five years, that is M-17 for 26 to 30 years, M-16 for 31 to 35 years, M-15 for 36 to 40 years, M-14 for 41 to 45 years, and M-13 for 46 to 50 years, then reduced by two units for every five years, that is, M-11 for 51 to 55 years, M-9 for 56 to 60 years, M-7 for 61 to 65 years and M-5 for 66 to 70 years.

8. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi & Ors. [(2017) 16 SCC 680] has clarified the law under Sections 166, 163-A and 168 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, on the following aspects:-

(A) Deduction of personal and living expenses to determine multiplicand;

(B) Selection of multiplier depending on age of deceased; (C) Age of deceased on basis for applying multiplier;

4 of 13 ::: Downloaded on - 14-01-2026 04:58:59 ::: FAO-2262-2021 -5- (D) Reasonable figures on conventional heads, namely, loss of estate, loss of consortium and funeral expenses, with escalation;

(E) Future prospects for all categories of persons and for different ages: with permanent job; self-employed or fixed salary.

The relevant portion of the judgment is reproduced as under:-

"52. As far as the conventional heads are concerned, we find it difficult to agree with the view expressed in Rajesh². It has granted Rs.25,000 towards funeral expenses, Rs 1,00,000 towards loss of consortium and Rs 1,00,000 towards loss of care and guidance for minor children. The head relating to loss of care and minor children does not exist. Though Rajesh refers to Santosh Devi, it does not seem to follow the same. The conventional and traditional heads, needless to say, cannot be determined on percentage basis because that would not be an acceptable criterion. Unlike determination of income, the said heads have to be quantified. Any quantification must have a reasonable foundation. There can be no dispute over the fact that price index, fall in bank interest, escalation of rates in many a field have to be noticed. The court cannot remain oblivious to the same. There has been a thumb rule in this aspect. Otherwise, there will be extreme difficulty in determination of the same and unless the thumb rule is

5 of 13 ::: Downloaded on - 14-01-2026 04:58:59 ::: FAO-2262-2021 -6- applied, there will be immense variation lacking any kind of consistency as a consequence of which, the orders passed by the tribunals and courts are likely to be unguided. Therefore, we think it seemly to fix reasonable sums. It seems to us that reasonable figures on conventional heads, namely, loss of estate, loss of consortium and funeral expenses should be Rs.15,000, Rs.40,000 and Rs.15,000 respectively. The principle of revisiting the said heads is an acceptable principle. But the revisit should not be fact-centric or quantum-centric. We think that it would be condign that the amount that we have quantified should be enhanced on percentage basis in every three years and the enhancement should be at the rate of 10% in a span of three years. We are disposed to hold so because that will bring in consistency in respect of those heads.

* * * * * 59.3. While determining the income, an addition of 50% of actual salary to the income of the deceased towards future prospects, where the deceased had a permanent job and was below the age of 40 years, should be made. The addition should be 30%, if the age of the deceased was between 40 to 50 years. In case the deceased was between the age of 50 to 60 years, the addition should be 15%. Actual salary should be read as actual salary less tax.

6 of 13 ::: Downloaded on - 14-01-2026 04:58:59 ::: FAO-2262-2021 -7- 59.4. In case the deceased was self-employed (or) on a fixed salary, an addition of 40% of the established income should be the warrant where the deceased was below the age of 40 years. An addition of 25% where the deceased was between the age of 40 to 50 years and 10% where the deceased was between the age of 50 to 60 years should be regarded as the necessary method of computation. The established income means the income minus the tax component.

59.5. For determination of the multiplicand, the deduction for personal and living expenses, the tribunals and the courts shall be guided by paras 30 to 32 of Sarla Verma⁴ which we have reproduced hereinbefore. 59.6. The selection of multiplier shall be as indicated in the Table in Sarla Verma¹ read with para 42 of that judgment.

59.7. The age of the deceased should be the basis for applying the multiplier.

59.8. Reasonable figures on conventional heads, namely, loss of estate, loss of consortium and funeral expenses should be Rs 15,000, Rs 40,000 and Rs 15,000 respectively. The aforesaid amounts should be enhanced at the rate of 10% in every three years."

9. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Magma General Insurance Company Limited Vs. Nanu Ram alias Chuhru Ram & Others [2018(18) SCC 130] after considering Sarla Verma (supra) and 7 of 13 ::: Downloaded on - 14-01-2026 04:58:59 ::: FAO-2262-2021 -8- Pranay Sethi (Supra) has settled the law regarding consortium. Relevant paras of the same are reproduced as under:-

"21. A Constitution Bench of this Court in Pranay Sethi² dealt with the various heads under which compensation is to be awarded in a death case. One of these heads is loss of consortium. In legal parlance, "consortium" is a compendious term which encompasses "spousal consortium", "parental consortium", and "filial consortium". The right to consortium would include the company, care, help, comfort, guidance, solace and affection of the deceased, which is a loss to his family. With respect to a spouse, it would include sexual relations with the deceased spouse.

21.1. Spousal consortium is generally defined as rights pertaining to the relationship of a husband-wife which allows compensation to the surviving spouse for loss of "company, society, cooperation, affection, and aid of the other in every conjugal relation".

21.2. Parental consortium is granted to the child upon the premature death of a parent, for loss of "parental aid, protection, affection, society, discipline, guidance and training".

21.3. Filial consortium is the right of the parents to compensation in the case of an accidental death of a child. An accident leading to the death of a child causes great shock and agony to the parents and family of the 8 of 13 ::: Downloaded on - 14-01-2026 04:58:59 ::: FAO-2262-2021 -9- deceased. The greatest agony for a parent is to lose their child during their lifetime. Children are valued for their love, affection, companionship and their role in the family unit.

22. Consortium is a special prism reflecting changing norms about the status and worth of actual relationships. Modern jurisdictions world-over have recognised that the value of a child's consortium far exceeds the economic value of the compensation awarded in the case of the death of a child. Most jurisdictions therefore permit parents to be awarded compensation under loss of consortium on the death of a child. The amount awarded to the parents is a compensation for loss of the love, affection, care and companionship of the deceased child.

23. The Motor Vehicles Act is a beneficial legislation aimed at providing relief to the victims or their families, in cases of genuine claims. In case where a parent has lost their minor child, or unmarried son or daughter, the parents are entitled to be awarded loss of consortium under the head of filial consortium. Parental consortium is awarded to children who lose their parents in motor vehicle accidents under the Act. A few High Courts have awarded compensation on this count. However, there was no clarity with respect to the principles on which compensation could be awarded on loss of filial consortium.

9 of 13 ::: Downloaded on - 14-01-2026 04:58:59 ::: FAO-2262-2021 -10-

24. The amount of compensation to be awarded as consortium will be governed by the principles of awarding compensation under "loss of consortium" as laid down in Pranay Sethi². In the present case, we deem it appropriate to award the father and the sister of the deceased, an amount of Rs 40,000 each for loss of filial consortium.

10. A perusal of the impugned award shows that the age of the deceased was 23 years at the time of accident. The factum of age is not disputed by either of the party before this Court. Consequently, the age of the deceased is rightly assessed by the Tribunal as 23 years by relying on the post-mortem report (Ex.P-3).

11. From the material available on record, it is revealed that the deceased was stated to be working as supplier of broiler and was earning Rs.40,000/- per month. To substantiate the same the appellants/claimants themselves appeared into the witness-box as PW-1 (Mr. Dalbir Singh, father of deceased) and PW-3 (Ms. Nanhi Devi @ Sunita, widow of deceased) and deposed that the deceased was supplier of broiler and was earning Rs.40,000/- per month. However, no documentary evidence qua the same has been produced.

12. Merely because claimants/appellants were unable to produce documentary evidence to show monthly income of deceased, same does not justify adoption of lowest tier of minimum wage while computing income. Therefore, there exist no reason to discard the oral testimonies of father(PW-1) and wife(PW-3) of the deceased, who deposed that the deceased was earning around Rs.40,000/- by selling/supplying broiler.

10 of 13 ::: Downloaded on - 14-01-2026 04:58:59 ::: FAO-2262-2021 -11-

13. Therefore, the learned Tribunal has wrongly assessed the income of the deceased as per the minimum wages prescribed for an unskilled labourer i.e. Rs.8,000/-per month. Even though no documentary evidence was produced by the claimants, still it is pertinent to note that the deceased was stated to be working in an unorganised sector, therefore, the formal documentation of earning is not always maintained, in view of this, the Ld. Tribunal erred in assessing the income of the deceased as Rs.8000/- per month. Support for this conclusion can also be drawn from the judgment rendered by this Court in FAO-2822-2006, titled as Tripta Rani and others Vs. Rajesh Kumar and another, decided on 15.10.2024. The relevant portion of the same is reproduced as under:-

10. Though no documentary evidence was submitted by the claimants, still it is pertinent to note that the deceased was working in an unorganised sector, therefore, the formal documentation of earning is not always maintained, in view of this, the Ld. Tribunal erred in assessing the income of the deceased as Rs.3000/- per month. Support for this conclusion can also be drawn from the judgment rendered by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Chandra @ Chanda @ Chandraram Vs. Mukesh Kumar Yadav, 2021 ACJ 2554, wherein it has been held as under:-

"Merely because claimants were unable to produce documentary evidence to show monthly income of deceased, same does not justify adoption of lowest tier of minimum wage while computing income. No reason to discard oral evidence of wife of deceased who deposed that deceased was earning around Rs.15000/- per month Deceased aged about 32 years on date of accident and..."

11. In view of the facts and legal principles outlined hereinabove, the income of Rs.3000/- as determined by 11 of 13 ::: Downloaded on - 14-01-2026 04:58:59 ::: FAO-2262-2021 -12- the Ld. Tribunal appears to be understated. Consequently, upon due consideration of the oral evidence on recod, it would be just and proper to assess the income of the deceased as Rs.8000/- per month. This assessment in my view, would better serve the ends of justice."

14. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice, this court is inclined to assess the income of the deceased as of a skilled worker i.e. Rs.10,000/- per month, as per the minimum wages prescribed for the skilled labours in the State of Haryana at the time of accident.

15. Further, the amount awarded under the heads of loss of estate, funeral expenses and loss of consortium is on the lower side and deserves to be enhanced. Therefore, the award requires indulgence of this Court. CONCLUSION

16. In view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the above referred to judgments, the present appeal is allowed. The award dated 03.02.2020 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Hisar is modified accordingly. The appellants-claimants are entitled to the enhanced amount of compensation from the respondents, as per the calculations made here-under:-

 Sr. No.                   Heads                            Compensation Awarded
      1     Monthly Income                          Rs.10,000/-
      2     Future prospects @ 40%                  Rs.4,000/- (10,000 X 40%)
      3     Deduction     towards     personal Rs.4,667/- (14,000 X 1/3)
            expenditure 1/3

      4.    Total Income                            Rs.9,333/- (14,000-4,667)




                                         12 of 13
                     ::: Downloaded on - 14-01-2026 04:58:59 :::
 FAO-2262-2021                                 -13-

       5    Multiplier                                18
       6    Annual Dependency                         Rs.20,15,928/- (9,333 X 12 X 18)
       7    Loss of Estate                            Rs.18,150/-
       8    Funeral Expenses                          Rs.18,150/-
       9    Loss of Consortium                        Rs.96,800/-
            Spousal : Rs. 48,400/-x 1
            Fillial : Rs.48,400/- x 1
       10   Total Compensation                        Rs.21,49,028/-
       11   Deduction
            Amount Awarded by the Tribunal            Rs. 17,22,800/-
       12   Enhanced amount                           Rs.4,26,228/- (21,49,028-17,22,800)

17. So far as the interest part is concerned, as held by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Dara Singh @ Dhara Banjara Vs. Shyam Singh Varma 2019 ACJ 3176 and R.Valli and Others VS. Tamil Nandu State Transport Corporation (2022) 5 Supreme Court Cases 107, the amount so calculated shall carry an interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition, till the date of realization.

18. The respondent No.2 is directed to deposit the enhanced amount along with interest at the rate of 9% with the Tribunal within a period of two months from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment. The Tribunal is directed to disburse the same to the appellants-claimants in their bank accounts. The appellants-claimants are directed to furnish their bank account details to the Tribunal.

(SUDEEPTI SHARMA) JUDGE 12.01.2026 Ayub Whether speaking/non-speaking : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes 13 of 13 ::: Downloaded on - 14-01-2026 04:58:59 :::

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Punjab-Haryana High Court