(O&M) Iqbal Kaur etc. Vs the Oriental Ins.Co.Ltd.

Present appeal has been preferred by appellants-claimants seeking enhancement of compensation granted vide award dated 08.05.2001 passed by Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Moga (hereinafter referred to as ‘ Tribunal ’). Appellant-claimants are wife and children of Atma Singh (hereinafter referred to as ‘ deceased ’), who had preferred claim petition on account of untimely death of deceased in motor vehicular accident dated 04.02.2001 on account of use of car bearing registration No.PB-29B-1740. 2. The petition was preferred under Section 163-A of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as ‘ 1988 Act ’). Learned Tribunal had allowed the petition and granted an amount of Rs.1,99,500/- as compensation. No appeal or cross-objections have been preferred by respondents challenging the award, therefore, only issue which arises in present appeal is as regards to quantum of compensation.

¶16

SUNIL CHANDER 2026.07.14 16:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶17

FAO-4610-2002 (O&M) -2-

¶18

Appellants-claimants are seeking enhancement of compensation. The sole ground raised by learned counsel for appellantsclaimants is that in view of amendment in Section 164 of 1988 Act, appellants-claimants are entitled to consolidated compensation under Section 164 of 1988 Act as provisions of Section 163-A of 1988 Act have been omitted and replaced by Section 164 setting fixed no-fault payout/compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs only) for death.

¶19

On the other hand, learned counsel for respondent No.1Insurance Company has argued that rights of appellants-claimants had crystallized on the date of accident and provisions applicable on date of accident only needs to be taken into consideration. It is further submitted that subsequent developments would not alter the rights and liabilities of the parties.

¶20

Facts are not in dispute in present case. Accident had taken place on 04.02.2001. Claim petition was filed under Section 163A of 1988 Act and compensation was also awarded under Section 163-A of 1988 Act. It is also not in dispute that w.e.f. 01.04.2022, amended Section 164 of 1988 Act came in force, whereby a fix amount of Rs.5,00,000/- for no fault liability was made effective. The only question which requires adjudication is whether the amended Section 164 of 1988 Act would be applicable as to grant compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- in case wherein accident had taken place prior to 01.04.2022.

¶21

The above noted issue is not res integra. Hon’ble Supreme Court in Roopa Vs. The Manager, Orix Auto Infrastructure Service Ltd. and Anr. , Civil Appeal No.6797 of 2026 decided on 27.04.2026; The New

¶22

SUNIL CHANDER 2026.07.14 16:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶23

FAO-4610-2002 (O&M) -3-

¶24

India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Urmila Halder , 2025 ACJ 244; and K.R. Jagadish and Anr. Vs. M/s. National Insurance Company Ltd. And Anr. , 2025 ACJ 188 has dealt this very issue and has concluded that since 1988 Act is beneficial legislation and amendment under Section 164 is procedural in nature, therefore, the compensation as amended under Section 164 can be awarded to appellants-claimants who had filed their petition under Section 163-A in accident which had occurred prior to 01.04.2022. In view of authoritative pronouncement by Hon’ble Supreme Court, it is clearly made out that Section 164 of 1988 Act being procedural amendment would be retrospective in nature and appellants-claimants would be entitled to receive compensation mandated therein.

¶25

Appeal is accordingly allowed. It is held that appellantsclaimants are entitled to Rs.5,00,000/- as compensation. The same be paid after adjusting amount already awarded and paid. The enhanced compensation shall be payable along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of claim petition till its realization as was awarded by Hon’ble Supreme Court in case titled K.R. Jagadish and Anr. Vs. M/s.

¶26

National Insurance Company Ltd. And Anr. (supra) . Apportionment and liability to pay compensation shall be as per award.

¶27

Pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of.

¶28

(PARMOD GOYAL) JUDGE

¶29

13.07.2026 Sunil Chander

¶30

Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No

¶31

SUNIL CHANDER 2026.07.14 16:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

(O&M) Iqbal Kaur etc. v. the Oriental Ins.Co.Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

(O&M) Iqbal Kaur etc. v. the Oriental Ins.Co.Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Tarsem Kaur Vs Paramjit Singh

Mithu Khan & Anr. Vs Naresh Kumar and Ors.

Sunita and Ors. Vs Rajiv Kumar and Ors.

Om Parkash Vs Hira Singh

Gurmail Kaur and Anr. Vs Darshan Singh and Ors.

Ram Singh Vs Parmod Kumar and Ors.