Krishan Lal through Lrs and Others Vs Ishwar Chand and Others

For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed and the delay of 60 days in filing the main appeal is condoned. However, the claimant-appellants shall not be entitled to any interest for the period of delay in filing the main appeal.

¶16

AMAN JAIN 2025.05.08 09:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment

¶17

114 FAO-3840-2023 (O&M)

¶18

-2-

¶19

FAO-3840-2023

¶20

The present appeal has been preferred by the claimant-appellants aggrieved by the quantum of compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Yamuna Nagar at Jagadhri (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Tribunal’) vide award dated 07.09.2022.

¶21

Since the factum of the accident is not in dispute, the facts, as recorded in the impugned award passed by the Tribunal, are not being adverted to herein for the sake of brevity.

¶22

The Tribunal in the present case had awarded the following

¶23

compensation :

¶24

Sr. No.	Heads	Compensation Awarded
1.	Monthlyincome	₹8,542
2.	Annual income	[₹8,542 x 12] = ₹1,02,504
3.	Deduction 1/2(@50%)	[₹1,02,504 - ₹51,252]= ₹51,252
4.	Futureprospects@40%	[₹51,252 + ₹20,501]= ₹71,753
5.	Multiplier of ‘18’	[₹71,753 x 18]= ₹12,91,554
6.	Funeral expenses	₹16,500
7.	Loss of estate	₹16,500
8.	Loss of consortium(filial)	₹88,000(₹44,000 x 2)
	Total Compensation	₹14,12,554 (rounded off to ₹14,12,550)
	Interest	@ 7.5%per annum

¶25

Learned counsel for the claimant-appellants would contend that

¶26

the claimant-appellants do not dispute the income of ₹8,542 as assessed, deduction of 1/2 (@ 50%) as made, addition @ 40% as made towards future prospects and multiplier of ‘18’ as applied by the Tribunal. Learned counsel would, however, contend that the amounts awarded under the head ‘loss of consortium’ and under the conventional heads are on the lower side. In

¶27

AMAN JAIN 2025.05.08 09:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment

¶28

114 FAO-3840-2023 (O&M) -3-

¶29

support of his contentions the learned counsel for the claimant-appellants has relied upon the judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the cases of National Insurance Company Ltd. vs. Pranay Sethi & Ors. [(2017) 16 SCC 680] , Magma General Insurance Company Limited vs. Nanu Ram alias Chuhru Ram & Ors. [(2018) 18 SCC 130] and N. Jayasree & Ors. vs. Cholamandalam M.S General Insurance Company Ltd. [2021(4) RCR (Civil) 642] .

¶30

Per contra , the learned counsel for respondent No.3-Insurance Company has vehemently argued that sufficient amount had already been awarded as compensation in the present case and that there is no scope of any enhancement.

¶31

Heard.

¶32

In the present case since there is no challenge to the income of ₹8,542 as assessed, deduction of 1/2 (@ 50%) as made, addition @ 40% as made towards future prospects and multiplier of ‘18’ as applied by the Tribunal, the same are maintained. However, the amounts awarded under the conventional heads as well as under the head ‘loss of consortium’ are on the lower side. As per the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the cases of Pranay Sethi (supra), Magma General Insurance Company Limited (supra) and N. Jayasree (supra), the claimant-appellants would be entitled to ₹18,000 (₹15,000 + 20% increase) towards loss of estate and ₹18,000 (₹15,000 + 20% increase) towards funeral expenses. Vide the impugned award only an amount of ₹88,000 had been granted under the head ‘loss of consortium’ to the mother and the father of the deceased. Claimant-

¶33

AMAN JAIN 2025.05.08 09:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment

¶34

114 FAO-3840-2023 (O&M) -4-

¶35

appellants No.1(ii) to 1(vi), being brothers and sister, were not granted any compensation under this head. Claimant-appellants No.1(ii) to 1(vi), being brothers and sister of the deceased, would certainly be entitled to ₹48,000 each (₹40,000 + 20% increase) towards loss of consortium.

¶36

12. Accordingly, the reworked compensation is as under :

¶37

Sr. No.	Heads	Compensation Awarded
1.	Monthlyincome	₹8,542
2.	Annual income	[₹8,542 x 12]= ₹1,02,504
3.	Deduction 1/2(@50%)	[₹1,02,504 - ₹51,252]= ₹51,252
4.	Futureprospects@40%	[₹51,252 + ₹20,501] = ₹71,753
5.	Multiplier of ‘18’	[₹71,753 x 18]= ₹12,91,554
6.	Funeral expenses	₹18,000
7.	Loss of estate	₹18,000
8.	Loss of consortium (i) Filial	₹2,88,000(₹48,000 x 6)
	Total Compensation	₹16,15,554

¶38

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, it is once again made clear that the claimant-appellants shall not be entitled to any interest for the period of delay in filing the main appeal.

¶39

In view of the decision by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Parminder Singh vs. Honey Goyal & Ors. [2025 INSC 361], Civil Appeal No.4299 of 2025 arising out of SLP (C) No.4484 of 2020 decided on 18.03.2025] , after calculation of the enhanced amount, the same be transferred by respondent No.3-Insurance Company in the bank account(s) of the claimant-appellants within a period of six weeks from today. The particulars

¶40

AMAN JAIN 2025.05.08 09:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment

¶41

114 FAO-3840-2023 (O&M) -5-

¶42

of the bank account(s) along with the requisite documents in support thereof shall be furnished by the claimant-appellants to respondent No.3-Insurance company within a period of two weeks from today and needful shall be done by respondent No.3-Insurance Company after verification thereof within a period of four weeks thereafter along with up-to-date interest. The compliance shall be reported by the Bank to the Tribunal concerned.

¶43

In view of the above discussion, the present appeal is allowed and the award passed by the Tribunal is modified accordingly. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed off.

¶44

07.05.2025 (ALKA SARIN) Aman Jain JUDGE

¶45

NOTE: Whether speaking/non-speaking: Speaking Whether reportable: Yes/No

¶46

AMAN JAIN 2025.05.08 09:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment

Krishan Lal through Lrs and Others v. Ishwar Chand and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Krishan Lal through Lrs and Others v. Ishwar Chand and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Amrik Singh Vs Darshan Singh Thorugh His Lrs. Sukhwinder Singh and Ors.

Ram Nath Mittal Vs Vinod Gupta

Santosh Kumari Vs Sardar Singh

Amrit Singh Walia Vs Avinash Chander Chadha

Rishi Raj Vs Ripudhaman Singh Dhillon

Khazan Singh Vs Gurdwara Akal Darbar Welfare Society