Sudesh & Ors. Vs Mukhtiar Singh & Ors.

for seeking enhancement of compensation, awarded by learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, on account of death of Darshan Kumar, in a motor vehicular accident.

¶20

Counsel for the parties heard.

¶21

SONU 2026.03.17 09:19 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

¶22

2

¶23

FAO-1007-2016

¶24

On appraisal of the evidence brought on record, learned Tribunal had concluded about the accident to have taken place on 01.10.2014, on account of rash and negligent driving of the bus bearing No.CH-01-TA-6565, being driven by respondent No.1-Mukhtiar Singh. It was also concluded by learned Tribunal about the said accident, to have resulted in death of Darshan Kumar, who was 54 years old, at the relevant time and he was working as ‘Sweeper’ in the Railway Department. Considering the same and also taking into consideration the last drawn salary, as depicted in salary certificate, which was proved in evidence as Ex.PW-1/B, the earnings of the deceased were worked upon as Rs.28,907/-. After making deduction on the count of income tax to the extent of Rs.660/-, the monthly earnings were taken as Rs.28,367/-, annual whereof comes to Rs.3,40,404/-. However, major son of the deceased, who is proforma respondent No.4 herein, was not considered as dependent upon the deceased and thus, claimants No.1 to 3, who are the appellants, being widow and unmarried daughters of the deceased, were considered as dependents. There was deduction to the extent of 1/3rd i.e. Rs.1,13,468/- and as such, the annual ‘loss of dependency’ was worked upon as Rs.2,27,036/-. Considering the age of the deceased to be 54, multiplier of ‘11’ was applied and while applying the same, the compensation was worked upon as Rs.24,97,396/(2,27,036 x 11).

¶25

Besides the aforesaid calculation, the compensation to the extent of Rs.25,000/- each was awarded on the counts of ‘loss of consortium’, as well as ‘funeral expenses’ and an amount of Rs.10,000/- was also awarded on the count of ‘loss of estate’. Total compensation was

¶26

SONU 2026.03.17 09:19 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

¶27

3

¶28

FAO-1007-2016

¶29

worked upon as Rs.25,57,396/-, which is now reproduced in tabular form as

¶30

herein:-

¶31

Earnings	Rs. 28,907/-
Liabilityof income tax	Rs. 660/-
Monthly earnings (after deduction of income tax)	Rs. 28,367/-
Annual earnings	Rs. 3,40,404/-(28,367 x 12)
Deduction(1/3^rd)	Rs. 1,13,468/-
Loss of dependency (Annual)	Rs. 2,27,036/-(3,40,404 – 1,13,468)
Multiplier applied(11)	Rs. 24,97,396/-(2,27,036 x 11)
Loss of consortium	Rs. 25,000/-
Funeral expenses	Rs. 25,000/-
Loss of Estate	Rs. 10,000/-
Total	Rs. 25,57,396/-

¶32

However, the ‘work on’ of compensation aforesaid, do call for recomputation.

¶33

So far as, age of the deceased is concerned, the same is not disputed by the parties. Also, the counsel for the parties do not dispute about employment of the deceased as ‘Sweeper’ in Railway Department and his monthly earnings to be Rs.28,907/- (before deduction of income tax). Even, counsel for the Insurance Company, does not dispute about the extent of income, worked upon by learned Tribunal, while making deduction of the income tax to the tune of Rs.660/-. After making requisite deduction of the income tax, the earnings are taken as Rs.28,367/-. Addition to the extent of 15% i.e. Rs.4,255/- has to be made, on the count of ‘future prospects’ and as such, the monthly earnings are now assessed as Rs.32,622/- (28,367 + 4,255). Also, the deduction to be made, is to the extent of 1/3rd i.e.

¶34

SONU 2026.03.17 09:19 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

¶35

4

¶36

FAO-1007-2016

¶37

Rs.10,874/- and as such, the monthly ‘loss of dependency’ works upon as Rs.21,748/- (32,622 – 10,874), annual whereof is Rs.2,60,976/-. Considering the age of the deceased, ‘11’ is the appropriate multiplier, as applied by learned Tribunal. After applying the same, the compensation works upon as Rs.28,70,736/- (2,60,976 x 11).

¶38

Besdies the aforesaid, as per ‘ National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi and others’ 2017(4) RCR (Civil) 1009 , considering the base amount of Rs.40,000/-, to be paid on the count of ‘loss of consortium’, which is having a clause of 10% enhancement, after every 3 years of pronouncement, now, the amount payable to each dependent is Rs.48,400/-. While taking it to be so, the amount on the count of ‘loss of consortium’ works upon as Rs.1,45,200/- (48,400 x 3). Besides the same, even under the count of ‘loss of estate’, as well as ‘funeral expenses’, an amount of Rs.36,300/- (18,150 + 18,150), is payable at present.

¶39

In view of the aforesaid, the appellants are also held entitled to an amount of Rs.1,81,500/- (1,45,200 + 36,300) under the conventional heads. As such, the appellants are entitled to the compensation, to the extent of Rs.30,52,236/- (28,70,736 + 1,81,500), which is reproduced in tabular form as herein:-

¶40

Earnings	Rs. 28,907/-
Liabilityof income tax	Rs. 660/-
Monthly earnings (after deduction of	Rs. 28,367/-
income tax)
Futureprospects(15%)	Rs. 4,255/-
Monthly earnings (after addition of	Rs. 32,622/- (28,367 + 4,255)
futureprospects)
Deduction(1/3^rd)	Rs. 10,874/-

¶41

SONU 2026.03.1 7 09:19 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

¶42

5

¶43

FAO-1007-2016

¶44

Loss of dependency (monthly)	Rs.21,748/-(32,622 – 10,874)
Annual loss of dependency	Rs.2,60,976/-(21,748 x 12)
Multiplier applied(11)	Rs.28,70,736/-(2,60,976 x 11)
Loss of consortium	Rs.1,45,200/-(48,400 x 3)
Funeral expenses	Rs. 18,150/-
Loss of Estate	Rs. 18,150/-
Total	Rs.30,52,236/-

¶45

After deducting an amount of Rs.25,57,396/- , which has already been awarded by learned Tribunal, from Rs.30,52,236/-, the appellants are entitled to enhanced amount of Rs.4,94,840/-. The apportionment of the enhanced amount shall be in consonance with the apportionment done by learned Tribunal i.e. to the extent of 40% to be awarded to the widow and 30% each, to the daughters. On the enhanced amount, the appellants shall be held liable to the interest @ 6% per annum, from the date of filing of the appeal, till realization. In case of any default on the part of the Insurance Company, to make the payment in the given period, it shall be liable to pay penal interest @ 8% per annum, till realization.

¶46

In view of the aforesaid terms, the FAO stands allowed.

¶47

(ARCHANA PURI) 16.03.2026 JUDGE Himanshu Vats Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes Whether reportable : Yes/No

¶48

SONU 2026.03.17 09:19 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

Sudesh & Ors. v. Mukhtiar Singh & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sudesh & Ors. v. Mukhtiar Singh & Ors.

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

Madhu Vs Surinder Pal

Sarita Rani Vs Kuldeep Kumar

Neha Vs Aditya Sharma

Sweety Vs Balinder Singh

Vineetpal Kaur Kainth Vs Lt Col Dr Harpreet Singh

Bhola Devi & Ors. Vs State of Punjab & Ors.