High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh (Nidhi Gupta, J.), decision dated 12.01.2026, in CM-26536-CII-2025 in/and FAO-2384-2020 (O&M) — Gurnam Kaur and another v. Mandeep Singh and others. The application under Order 41 Rule 19 read with Section 151 CPC for restoration of the appeal (dismissed for non-prosecution on 02.12.2025) was allowed and the appeal restored; but the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of 437 days' delay was dismissed, the cited reason (procuring the complete record) being vague and insufficient. On merits, the claimants — parents of Sandeep Singh (22), who died in the accident of 13.03.2017 while riding pillion on an Activa Scooter driven by respondent No.1 — sought enhancement of the MACT Fatehgarh Sahib Award dated 01.08.2018 (Rs.11,64,000/- with interest @ 7.5% p.a.) solely on the ground of non-payment of consortium. The Court held that no challenge having been laid to the father (claimant No.2) being denied compensation, at best the mother could claim consortium; applying New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Vinish Jain ((SC) SLP No.13931 of 2017; cited as (2018) 3 SCC 619) — variation of about 4 to 5 per cent being within permissible limits and not warranting interference — as followed and reiterated by the Kerala High Court in Divisional Controller v. Alikutty and Reliance General Insurance v. Adila, it declined interference. The Tribunal's computation (Rs.7,500/- p.m. as skilled worker, 50% deduction, 40% future prospects, multiplier 18; Rs.15,000/- each for funeral expenses and loss of estate) was upheld, the alleged income of Rs.20,000/- p.m. being unproved. The Court also observed that per DDR entry Ex.C1 the accident was attributed to natural circumstances beyond human control and that respondent No.1 (the driver) is another son of the claimants. Appeal dismissed on merits as well as on grounds of delay.
