Shriram General Insurance Company Limited Vs Ram Avtar and Others — Punjab & Haryana HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Shriram General Insurance Company Limited Vs Ram Avtar and Others — Punjab & Haryana HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Both cross appeals disposed of: insurer's challenge to issue No.1 rejected; compensation enhanced by adding 40% future prospects and substituting Pranay Sethi conventional heads (Rs.48,000/- consortium per claimant, Rs.18,000/- loss of estate, Rs.18,000/- funeral expenses) for the Rs.1.00 lakh lump sum, with interest @7% p.a. on the enhanced amount from filing till realization; statutory amount to be remitted to the Tribunal.

Issue for consideration

Whether the offending vehicle bearing Registration No.HR-37-D-7776, insured by the appellant-insurance company, was the cause of the accident having been driven in a rash and negligent manner (Tribunal issue No.1). +1 more

Court's answer

No interference with the Tribunal's findings on issue No.1: the offending vehicle bearing Registration No.HR-37-D-7776, insured by the appellant, was held to be the reason of the accident, driven in a rash and negligent manner; those findings are maintainable.

Ratio / Principle

Nothing was awarded towards future prospects; 40% is required to be added to the income, while the 1/4th deduction and multiplier of 17 applied by the Tribunal are upheld.

Key takeaways

Applying the ratio of Pranay Sethi, each claimant is entitled to Rs.48,000/- for loss of consortium, and the claimants are entitled to Rs.18,000/- for loss of estate and Rs.18,000/- for funeral expenses; the Tribunal's consolidated Rs.1.00 lakh for loss of love and affection stands revised accordingly.ratio¶¶11
The claimants are entitled to interest at 7% per annum on the enhanced amount, from the date of filing of the application until actual realization.ratio¶¶13

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Cross appeals against the common award dated 04.07.2017 of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Patiala, arising from the death of Malkeet Singh (aged 26) in a motor vehicular accident. The insurer's challenge to Tribunal issue No.1 failed: the charge-sheet (Ex. P3) and the police report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. (Ex.P-4), proved on record, established that the insured vehicle bearing Registration No.HR-37-D-7776 caused the accident while being driven in a rash and negligent manner, notwithstanding that the FIR originally named an unknown vehicle and driver. On quantum, the Court affirmed the notional income of Rs.8,000/- per month (State minimum wage for a semi-skilled worker being Rs.7,627/-), directed addition of 40% towards future prospects, and upheld the 1/4th deduction and multiplier of 17. Following National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi, 2017(4) RCR (Civil) 1009, the consolidated Rs.1.00 lakh for loss of love and affection was replaced by Rs.48,000/- per claimant for loss of consortium, Rs.18,000/- for loss of estate and Rs.18,000/- for funeral expenses, with interest @7% per annum on the enhanced amount from the date of filing of the application till actual realization. Appeals disposed of; statutory amount to be remitted to the Tribunal.

1 These are cross appeals directed against the common award dated 04.07.2017 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Patiala.

POOJA SHARMA 2025.05.19 16:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Page 1 of 3

2 is at the instance of insurance company challenging the findings on issues no.1 and 3.

is at the behest of the claimants asking the Court to revisit the assessment of compensation awarded by the Tribunal.

4 Mr. Punit Jain, Advocate for the insurance company while assailing findings on issue No.1 submits that the FIR was registered against unknown vehicle and unknown driver. Thus false implication of the vehicle insured by the appellant cannot be ruled out. However, he is not in a position to dispute that subsequent to registration of FIR police investigated the matter and filed report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. inducting the offending vehicle and the driver thereof. Charge-sheet Ex. P3 and report under Section 173 Cr.P.C Ex.P-4 have been proved on record.

5 In view thereof, this Court does not find any reason to interfere in the findings recorded by Tribunal on issue No.1 holding the offending vehicle bearing Registration No.HR-37-D-7776 ensured by the appellant to be the reason of the accident having been driven in rash and negligent manner. The findings recorded by the Tribunal on issue No.1 are thus maintainable.

6 The claim petition relates to death of Malkeet Singh who died at young age of 26 years in a motor vehicular accident. In the absence of there being any evidence the Tribunal has taken his monthly income at Rs.8,000/- per month. Even as per the minimum wages notified by State for the relevant period, the same are Rs.7,627/- for the semi skilled worker.

POOJA SHARMA 2025.05.19 16:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Page 2 of 3

Nothing has been paid on account of future prospects. 40% need to be added. 1/4^th deduction has been rightly applied. Multiplier of 17 has been rightly applied. However, Tribunal has granted consolidated sum of Rs.1.00 lakh for loss of love and affection. The same needs to be revised. In view of ratio of law laid down by Supreme Court in National Insurance Co., Ltd., Vs. Pranay Sethi & ors., 2017(4) RCR (Civil) 1009 each of the claimants is for a sum of Rs.48,000/- for loss of consortium. The claimants are also entitled to Rs.18,000/- for loss of estate and Rs.18,000/- for funeral expenses.

7 Appeals are disposed off.

8 Needless to say that the claimants shall be entitled to interest @7% per annum on the enhanced amount for the period commencing from date of filing of the application till the date of actual realization.

9 Statutory amount be remitted to the Tribunal.

10 Photocopy of this order be placed on the connected file.

POOJA SHARMA 2025.05.19 16:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Page 3 of 3