Memoona and Ors. Vs Sukh Ram @ Sukha and Ors.

Present appeal has been preferred by the appellants-claimants who are the wife and children of Tayub (hereinafter referred to as the ‘ deceased ’), who died in motor vehicular accident which took place on 20.02.1997, on account of rash and negligent driving by respondent No.1 while driving truck bearing registration No. HYG.326, being aggrieved by the insufficient compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- awarded vide impugned award dated 05.09.2000, passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Gurgaon (hereinafter referred to as ‘ Tribunal ’), being not in accordance with their entitlement.

¶17

Since in present appeal the only issue raised by appellantsclaimants is as regards to quantum of compensation, the detailed facts as

¶18

SUNIL CHANDER 2026.07.06 18:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶19

FAO-1770-2002 (O&M)

¶20

-2-

¶21

regards to manner of accident are not being noticed herein for the sake of brevity.

¶22

In present case, learned Tribunal had awarded the following

¶23

compensation:

¶24

Income	Rs.1,500/- per month
Deduction	1/3rd (1500-500=1,000)
Multiplier	16
Loss of dependency	Rs.1,92,000/-
Funeral expenses	Rs.8,000/-
Total compensation awarded	Rs.2,00,000/-

¶25

Learned counsel for the appellants-claimants contented that the deceased was earning Rs.4,000/- by working as a mechanic. Learned Counsel for the appellants-claimants has also asserted that no addition has been made towards future prospects which ought to be made to the extent of 40% in terms of judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi and Ors. , 2017 (16) SCC 680 and deduction of 1/5^th is required to be made towards personal expenses of deceased as deceased is survived by six dependents. Appropriate amount of compensation needs to be granted under the head funeral expenses, loss of estate and loss of parental consortium in accordance with law laid down by Hon’ble Supreme Court.

¶26

In the present case appellants-claimants have claimed that deceased was earning Rs.4,000/- per month, as the deceased was working as

¶27

SUNIL CHANDER 2026.07.06 18:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶28

FAO-1770-2002 (O&M) -3-

¶29

a mechanic. However, except for making oral assertions that deceased was working as a mechanic and earning Rs.4,000/- per month, no documentary evidence has been placed on record to show income and vocation of deceased. No evidence is available to conclude that deceased was technically qualified to work as mechanic by way of education or training or by long experience. In absence of any evidence supporting oral claim that deceased was earning Rs.4,000/- per month by working as a mechanic, learned Tribunal has rightly taken minimum wages payable to a skilled worker prevalent at the time of accident. Accordingly, income of deceased is taken as Rs.1,558/- per month. Since the deceased was aged 35 years at the time of accident as per the post-mortem report, accordingly multiplier of ‘16’ would be applicable while determining loss of dependency. Similarly, keeping in view age of the deceased, 40% towards future prospects ought to be added to the income of the deceased in view of judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi &Ors. (supra) . Since the deceased is survived by six dependents i.e wife and five children, 1/5^th deductions towards personal expenses needs to be made. Further, appellant-claimant No.1 shall also be entitled to compensation for loss of spousal consortium @ Rs.15,000/-, appellants-claimants No.2 to 6 shall be entitled to compensation for loss of parental consortium @ Rs.15,000/- each. Appellants-claimants shall be entitled to Rs.7,500/- towards funeral expenses and Rs.7,500/- towards loss of estate. It is however made clear that in case Hon’ble Supreme Court answer the reference regarding quantum of compensation under conventional head made in Hasina Yasmin &Ors. Vs. National Insurance Co. Ltd. , 2025 SCC Online SC 2919 in favour of

¶30

SUNIL CHANDER 2026.07.06 18:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶31

FAO-1770-2002 (O&M)

¶32

-4-

¶33

appellants, appellants shall be free to seek said amount by moving appropriate application in this regard.

¶34

6. Accordingly, reworked compensation is as under :-

¶35

Income	Rs.1,558/- per month	Rs.1,558/- per month
Future prospects	40% (1558+623)	Rs.2,181/-
Deduction	1/5^th (2181-436)	Rs.1,745/-
Multiplier	16	16
Total loss of	Rs.1,745X12X16	Rs.3,35,040/-
dependency
Loss of Estate		Rs. 7,500/-
Funeral Expenses		Rs. 7,500/-
Loss of spousal		Rs.15,000/-
consortium to claimant No.1
Loss of parental	Rs.15,000x5	Rs.75,000/-
consortium to claimant Nos.2 to 6
Total compensation awarded in appeal		Rs.4,40,040/-
Total compensation	Rs.2,00,000/-
awarded by the Tribunal
Enhanced amount of compensation	Rs.4,40,040/- (awarded in appeal) – Rs.2,00,000/- (awarded by the Tribunal)	Rs.2,40,040/-

¶36

SUNIL CHANDER 2026.07.06 18:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶37

FAO-1770-2002 (O&M) -5-

¶38

Appellants-claimants shall be entitled to enhanced compensation along with 7.5% interest from the date of filing of claim petition till realization of entire amount. Apportionment and liability to pay compensation shall be as per award.

¶39