Punjab-Haryana High Court
Reliance General Ins.Co.Ltd vs Gagandeep Kaur & Ors on 6 July, 2023
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:085241
FAO No. 224 of 2016 -1-
2023:PHHC:085241
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
FAO No. 224 of 2016 (O&M)
& XOBJC-91-CII-2016
Date of decision : 6.7.2023
...
Reliance General Insurance Company Limited
................Appellant
vs.
Gagandeep Kaur and others
.................Respondents
Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice H. S. Madaan
Present: Mr. Ashwani Talwar, Advocate for the appellant
Mr. Vikas Kumar Gupta, Advocate for respondents No.1
to 6 (Cross objectors)
...
H. S. Madaan, J. (Oral)
On account of death of Harwinder Singh s/o Amrik Singh,
aged about 40 years, statedly working as an agriculturist, earning a
sum of Rs.30,000/- per month, in a road side accident, which took
place on 24.11.2014, at about 6.00 P.M., in the area of Village Panua,
Badala Road, within jurisdiction of Police Station Kharar, statedly on
account of rash and negligent driving of motor-cycle bearing
registration No. CH-01-AL-5312 by respondent No.1 Sajjan Singh,
LRs of such deceased, namely, his widow Smt. Gagandeep Kaur,
aged 37 years, minor daughters - Parveen Kaur, aged 17 years,
1 of 5
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:085241
2023:PHHC:085241
Neetu Kaur, aged 15 years, minor sons -Sukhwinder Singh, aged 9
years, Gurdeep Singh, aged 11 years and mother - Nachhatar Kaur,
aged 72 years, all resident of village Jamitgarh, Tehsil and District
Fatehgarh Sahib, had brought a claim petition under Section 166 of
the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against respondents i.e. Sajjan Singh -
driver, Mohan Singh - owner and Reliance General Insurance Co.
Ltd., through its Branch Manager, Chandigarh - - insurer of the
motor-cycle in question.
After contest, the said petition was accepted by the Motor
Accidents Claims Tribunal, SAS Nagar, Mohali, vide award dated
9.11.2015 and compensation of Rs.14,41,800/- with interest @ 9%
per annum was awarded to the petitioner -claimants payable by all
the three respondents, jointly and severally alongwith costs of the
petition, as per details given below :-
Date of Accident 24.11.2014
Age of the deceased Harwinder Singh 40 years
Claimants
1. Gagandeep Kaur, widow
2. Parveen Kaur, minor daughter
3. Neetu Kaur, minor daughter
4. Sukhwinder Singh, minor son
5. Gurdeep Singh, minor son
6. Nachhattar Kaur, mother
Sr.No. Heads of Claim Tribunal
Amount
1 Annual income Rs.6,500 X 12 + 78,000/-
2 30% Future prospects Rs. 23,400/-
3 Total income of deceased Rs.1,01,400/-
4 Personal and living expenses (1/5th) Rs. 20,280/-
Income after deduction of personal and living Rs. 81,120/-
5 expenses
6 Multiplier 15 (Fifteen)
2 of 5
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:085241
2023:PHHC:085241
Sr.No. Heads of Claim Tribunal
Rs.81,120/- x 15
7 Amount of compensation = Rs.12,16,800/-
8 Loss of consortium Rs. 1,00,000/-
9 Loss of care and guidance to minor children Rs. 1,00,000/-
10 Funeral expenses Rs. 25,000/-
11 Grand Total Rs. 14,41,800/-
Finding the compensation so awarded to be on higher side,
respondent No.3 - Insurance Company has approached this Court by
way of filing the present appeal , notice of which was given to the
respondents. The respondents- claimants have put in appearance
through counsel. Cross objections have also been filed on behalf of
the respondents-claimants, seeking enhancement of compensation.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties, besides going
through the record.
Learned counsel appearing for the appellant- Insurance
company has confined his arguments with regard to grant of
quantum of compensation, not seriously disputing the monthly
income of the deceased, assessed as Rs.6,500/-, but objecting to 30%
of the future prospects. According to him in terms of judgment
National Insurance Company Limited vs. Pranay Sethi, 2017 (4)
RCR (Civil) 1009, the addition should have been to the extent of
25%. The Tribunal has taken age of the deceased to be 40 years.
Therefore, addition towards future prospects should have been made
to the extent of 25%. As such, total income of the deceased comes
out to be (Rs. 6500 X 12) 78,000 + 19,500 (25% future prospects) =
Rs.97,500/-.
3 of 5
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:085241
2023:PHHC:085241
The Tribunal has made deduction of 1/5th of the income of
the deceased towards his personal and living expenses. In terms of
the judgment Smt. Sarla Verma vs. Delhi Transport Corporation
2009 (3) RCR (Civil) 77, where the number of dependent family
members is 4 to 6, the deduction should be 1/4th. Therefore, 1/4th of
the amount is to be deducted on that count. As such the dependancy
of the claimants comes out to be 97,500 - 24,375 = Rs. 73,125/-.
Considering the age of the deceased, the multiplier of 15 has
rightly been applied by the Tribunal. Thus, the total amount of
compensation comes out to be Rs. 73,125 X 15 = Rs. 10,96,875/-.
The Tribunal has award a sum of Rs. 1 lac under the Head
Loss of consortium. However, in view of judgment passed by the
Apex Court in Civil Appeal Nos. 2410-2412/2023 (@ SLP ( C) Nos.
11669-11671/2020), decided on 27.3.2023 titled as Shri Ram
General Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Bhagat Singh Rawat and others, the
claimants are entitled to Rs.40,000/- under this Head. The Tribunal
has awarded a sum of Rs. 1 lac to the claimants under the Head loss
of care and guidance to minor children. But no compensation can be
awarded under this Head, as per the settled law. Funeral expenses to
the tune of Rs.25,000/- have been awarded, when it should have been
Rs.15,000/-. No amount for loss of estate has been given. A sum of
Rs.15,000/- is awarded to the claimants under that Head. As such,
the total compensation comes out to be 10,96,875 + 40,000 + 15,000
+ 15,000 = Rs. 11,66,875/-.
The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.14,41,800/-, which is
reduced to Rs.11,66,875/-.
4 of 5
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:085241
2023:PHHC:085241
Although Learned counsel for the claimants has submitted
that the Tribunal has taken the income of deceased on lower side, but
I do not find myself in agreement with him on this point, since no
cogent or convincing evidence is there on record to show that the
deceased was an agriculturist and earning Rs.30,000/- per month.
Furthermore, no reason is there to enhance the compensation. Rather
it has been reduced keeping in view the detailed discussion above.
No other argument was advanced by either of the counsel.
Therefore, the appeal filed by the Insurance company is
allowed partly. The impugned award is modified and the
compensation awarded of Rs.14,41,800/- is reduced to
Rs.11,66,875/-, payable with interest @ 9% per annum by all the
three respondents, jointly and severally. The apportionment of
compensation shall be reduced proportionately, however, in the same
manner as directed by the Tribunal in the impugned award. The mode
of payment shall also remain same.
The cross objections stand dismissed.
( H.S. Madaan )
6.7.2023 Judge
chugh
Whether speaking / reasoned Yes / No
Whether reportable Yes / No
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:085241
5 of 5
