Claimants sought enhancement of motor accident compensation for a deceased milk vendor-agriculturist, challenging income assessment, exclusion of major sons, and absence of consortium to them. The High Court found no error in the Tribunal's assessment and dismissed the appeal.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
FAO-2522-2021 (O&M) -1 -
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
106 FAO-2522-2021 (O&M) Date of decision: 16.01.2026
Rambati and others
...Appellant(s)
Vs.
Junish and others
...Respondent(s)
CORAM: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA
Present:Mr. Tushar Gera, Advocate for the appellants.
NIDHI GUPTA, J.
The present appeal has been filed by the claimants seeking enhancement of compensation of Rs.10,22,215/- awarded by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Palwal (hereinafter “the learned Tribunal”) vide Award dated 22.02.2021 passed in MACT Case No. 131 dated 20.09.2018 filed u/s 166 of Motor Vehicles Act, (hereinafter “the Act”). The 3 claimants are the 52-year-old widow; 26-yer-old son; and 31-year-old son of deceased Prakash alias Om Parkash, who was 55 years old at time of accident.
(hereinafter “the offending vehicle”) being driven by respondent No.1; DIVYANSHI 2026.01.16 16:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
FAO-2522-2021 (O&M) -2 -
owned by respondent No.2; and insured by respondent No.3. The Tribunal awarded above said compensation along with interest @ 7.5% per annum. All the respondents were held jointly and severally liable to pay the amount of compensation.
to have been made instead of 1/3rd. Even consortium has not been awarded to claimants No.2 and 3. Even income of the deceased has been wrongly assessed as only Rs.9,837/- p.m. Learned counsel contends that it was proved on record that deceased was a milk vendor and agriculturist. As such, his income ought to have been assessed as that of a highly skilled labour. It is accordingly prayed that the present Appeal be allowed; and the impugned Award be modified/enhanced.
of the appellants was that the deceased was an agriculturist and also a milk vendor. It was further pleaded that deceased was owner of 4 acres of land as per Jamabandi Ex.P14 to Ex.P21. It is admitted fact on record that the said land holding of the deceased has devolved upon the claimants. As such, income of the deceased was only required to be assessed as per the
DIVYANSHI 2026.01.16 16:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
FAO-2522-2021 (O&M) -3 -
managerial/supervisory wages for managing the said land. Accordingly, learned Tribunal had taken income of the deceased as Rs.9,837/- p.m. as that of a skilled labourer as per relevant DC rate. Contention of the appellants that the same ought to have been assessed as that of a highly skilled labourer is without merit and is accordingly rejected. In any event, appellants have been unable to produce any Notification to show the wages payable to a highly skilled worker. Accordingly, I find no error in the income of Rs.9,837/- p.m. as assessed by the learned Tribunal.
DIVYANSHI 2026.01.16 16:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
FAO-2522-2021 (O&M) -4 -
the Legal Representatives/appellants only have a "right to apply" for compensation and it is for the learned Tribunal to consider whether the said Legal Representatives were "fully dependent" on the deceased. In the present case, nothing has been shown to this Court to prove that the claimants No.2 and 3 were "fully dependent" on the deceased. Nothing has been shown to this Court to prove the financial dependence of the said claimants upon the deceased. On the contrary, in the present case, the land holding of the deceased has been inherited by the claimants; and claimants No.2 and 3 are admitted to be young and able sons of the deceased; and nothing has been brought on record to show the financial dependence of the claimants no.2 and 3 upon the deceased. As such, I find no error in the Award.
DIVYANSHI 2026.01.16 16:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
FAO-2522-2021 (O&M) -5 -
loss of estate; and Rs.15,000/- towards loss of funeral expenses; thereby granting total compensation of Rs.10,22,215/-.
“18. It is to be borne in mind, the accident occurred on 23,2,2019. It is more than 2 ½ years since the respondents 1 to 4 have been knocking at the doors of the Courts seeking compensation on account of the death of the bread-winner. It is trite law that the Tribunal is permitted to do some guess work and also exercise its discretion to fix the reasonable and just compensation, for which there cannot be any straitjacket formula based on mathematical precision. In New India Assurance Company Vs. Vinish Jain and Others [(2018) 3 SCC 619], the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that if the fixation of compensation is within permissible limits, the courts should normally not interfere with such awards”.
in “ Reliance General Insurance Company Limited Vs. Adila and Others”,
Law Finder Doc ID # 1921609, paras 16 and 17 of which read as under:-
DIVYANSHI 2026.01.16 16:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
FAO-2522-2021 (O&M) -6 -
“ 16. The other area of dispute is that the Tribunal after awarding compensation under the conventional heads has awarded Rs.75,000/- towards loss of love and affection and Rs.10,000/- awarded towards pain and sufferings.
17. In New India Assurance Co., Ltd v. Vineesh.J[2018 (3) SCC 619] , the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that the Appellate Court can permit variation of plus or minus 4 to 5 percent.”
16.01.2026
Divyanshi
(NIDHI GUPTA) JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No
DIVYANSHI 2026.01.16 16:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the Tribunal erred in dismissing the claim of major sons and deducting 1/3rd towards personal expenses.
Whether the deceased's income should have been assessed as that of a highly skilled worker rather than a skilled labourer.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
National Insurance Company Limited v. BirenderRelied on¶6
National Insurance Company Limited v. Birender (SC) : Law Finder Doc Id # 1665184
New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Vinish JainRelied on¶9
(SC) SLP No.13931 of 2017 titled as "New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Vinish Jain & Others" Law Finder Doc ID # 977386
The Managing Director, Divisional Controller v. AlikuttyExplained¶10
"The Managing Director, Divisional Controller Versus Alikutty and Others" Law Finder Doc Id # 1885188
Reliance General Insurance Company Limited v. AdilaReferred¶11
"Reliance General Insurance Company Limited Vs. Adila and Others", Law Finder Doc ID # 1921609
Reshma KumariRelied on¶12
Reshma Kumari supra
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Rambati and others
Junish and others
Nidhi Gupta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
