[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Punjab-Haryana High Court
Paramjit Kaur & Ors vs Jagir Singh & Ors on 21 January, 2026
Author: Alka Sarin
Bench: Alka Sarin
244-2
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
FAO-3367-2017 O&M)
Date of Decision : 21.01.2026
Paramjit Kaur & Ors ... Appellant(s)
Versus
Jagir Singh & Ors ... Respondent(s)
CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ALKA SARIN
Present : Mr. Chander Shekhar Singhal, Advocate for the appellants.
Mr. Rajbir Singh, Advocate for respondent No.3.
Mr. Parmod Chauhan, Advocate for respondent Nos.4 and 5.
Mr. Pradeep Kumar, Advocate for respondent No.6.
ALKA SARIN, J. (Oral)
CM-11118-CII-2017
1. For the reasons mentioned therein, the application seeking
condonation of delay of 22 days in refiling the appeal is allowed and the delay
of 22 days in refiling the appeal is condoned.
CM-11119-CII-2017
2. For the reasons mentioned therein, the application seeking
condonation of delay of 271 days in filing the appeal is allowed and the delay
of 271 days in filing the appeal is condoned. However, the claimant-appellants
shall not be entitled to any interest for the period of delay in filing the appeal.
FAO-3367-2017
3. The present appeal has been preferred by the claimant-appellants
aggrieved by the quantum of compensation awarded by the Motor Accident
authenticity of this order/judgment.
Claims Tribunal, Yamuna Nagar (hereinafter referred to as 'Tribunal') vide
the impugned award dated 17.12.2015 in a motor vehicle accident which
occurred on 26.06.2012.
4. Since the factum of the accident is not in dispute, the facts are
not being adverted to for the sake of brevity.
5. The Tribunal in the present case had awarded the following
compensation :
Sr. No. Heads Compensation Awarded
1 Monthly Income ₹6,000/-
2 Annual Income ₹72,000/- [₹6,000 x 12]
3 Deduction - 1/4th ₹54,000/- [₹72,000 - ₹18,000]
4 Multiplier - 15 ₹8,10,000/- [₹54,000 x 15]
5 Loss of estate ₹5,000/-
6 Funeral expenses ₹25,000/-
7 Loss of consortium ₹2,50,000/-
Total Compensation ₹10,90,000/- (written as ₹11,20,000/-
Interest 8%
6. Learned counsel for the claimant-appellants would contend that
he does not challenge the income, deduction and the compensation awarded
under the conventional heads as well as under the head loss of consortium.
He, however, states that the Tribunal has wrongly applied a multiplier of 15
and has also not made any addition towards future prospects. Learned counsel
would further contend that the deceased was 35 years of age at the time of the
accident, hence, a multiplier of 16 and an addition of 40% towards future
prospects ought to have been applied. In support of his contentions, he has
relied upon the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of Sarla
Verma & Ors. vs. Delhi Transport Corporation & Anr. [(2009) 6 SCC 121]
authenticity of this order/judgment.
and National Insurance Company Ltd. vs. Pranay Sethi & Ors. [(2017) 16
SCC 680].
7. Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondent-Insurance
Company has vehemently argued that sufficient amount has already been
awarded as compensation in the present case and that there is no scope of any
enhancement.
8. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties.
9. Admittedly, no appeal has been preferred by the Insurance
Company. In the present case, since no challenge has been laid by the learned
counsel for the claimant-appellants to the income, deduction and the
compensation awarded under the conventional heads as well as under the head
loss of consortium, the same are maintained accordingly. However, the
Tribunal has not made any addition towards future prospects as also a
multiplier of 15 has wrongly been applied inasmuch as the deceased was
admittedly 35 years of age, hence, as per the law laid down by the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in the cases of Pranay Sethi (supra) and Sarla Verma
(supra), 40% addition is made towards future prospects and a multiplier of 16
would be applicable. Accordingly, the reworked compensation is as under :
Sr. No. Heads Compensation Awarded
1 Monthly Income ₹6,000/-
2 Annual Income ₹72,000/- [₹6,000 x 12]
3 Deduction - 1/4th ₹54,000/- [₹72,000 - ₹18,000]
4 Future Prospects - 40% ₹75,600/- [₹54,000 + ₹21,600]
5 Multiplier - 16 ₹12,09,600/- [₹75,600 x 16]
6 Loss of estate ₹5,000/-
7 Funeral expenses ₹25,000/-
8 Loss of consortium ₹2,50,000/-
Total Compensation ₹14,89,600/-
authenticity of this order/judgment.
10. The amount in excess of and over and above the amount awarded
by the Tribunal shall also attract interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of
filing of the claim petition till the realization of the entire amount. However,
the claimant-appellants shall not be entitled to any interest for the period of
delay in filing the appeal.
11. In view of the decision by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in
Parminder Singh Vs. Honey Goyal & Ors. [AIR 2025 SC 1713 = 2025
SCC OnLine SC 567], after calculation of the enhanced amount, the same be
transferred by the Insurance Company in the bank account(s) of the claimants
within six weeks from today and the apportionment thereof shall be as per the
direction of the Tribunal. The particulars of the bank account(s) alongwith the
requisite documents(s) in support thereof shall be furnished by the claimants
to the Insurance company within a period of two weeks from the date of this
order and needful shall be done by the Insurance Company after verification
thereof within four weeks thereafter alongwith up-to-date interest. The
compliance shall be reported by the Bank to the Tribunal concerned.
12. In view of the above discussion, the present appeal is allowed
and the award passed by the Tribunal stands modified accordingly. Pending
applications, if any, also stand disposed off.
21.01.2026 ( ALKA SARIN )
Yogesh Sharma JUDGE
NOTE: Whether speaking/non-speaking: Speaking
Whether reportable: YES/NO
authenticity of this order/judgment.
