Partly allowed

Kaushalya Devi and Ors. v. Bikkar Singh @ Kala and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC27 Apr 2026FAO/753/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Claimants sought enhancement of motor accident compensation, contending the deceased earned Rs.20,000 monthly from a karyana shop. The court found no evidence of business income beyond the rent agreement, upheld income at Rs.6,000 per month, but added Rs.15,000 for loss of estate.

What did the court decide?

Rs.15,000 awarded to claimants on account of loss of estate; rest of Tribunal's award maintained; appeal disposed of accordingly.

Kaushalya Devi and Ors. Vs Bikkar Singh @… — Motor Accident Claims | Punjab & Haryana HC (2026)

¶1

291

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶3

FAO-753-2017 Date of decision : 27.04.2026

¶4

KAUSHALYA DEVI AND ORS ....Appellants

¶5

Versus

¶6

BIKKAR SINGH @ KALA AND ORS ...Respondents

¶7

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ JAIN

¶8

Present: Mr. Gaurav, Advocate Mr. Rajbir Singh, Advocate for the appellants.

¶9

Mr. Dhiraj Jindal, Advocate for respondent No.2.

¶10

Mr. Lalit Garg, Advocate for respondent No.3.

¶11

PANKAJ JAIN, J. (ORAL)

¶12

Claimants are in appeal seeking enhancement of compensation.

¶13

Counsel for the appellants has raised two-fold arguments. He submits that the deceased was running a karyana shop and earning Rs.20,000/- per month. In order to prove the same, rent agreement Ex.C7 was placed on record, yet the Tribunal has ignored the same. He further submits that nothing has been paid on account of loss of estate.

¶14

Having heard counsel for the parties and after carefully perusing the records of the case, this Court finds that the plea raised vis-a-vis income of the deceased sans merit and cannot be accepted.

¶15

In order to prove that the deceased was running a retail business, the least the claimants to produce was GST number or some bills to prove that the deceased was purchasing material from the whole-seller or

¶16

DEEPAK KUMAR 2026.04.29 15:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶17

FAO-753-2017 -2-

¶18

to evince that the grocery was being sold to the customers. There is no evidence to prove the same.

¶19

In view thereof, no fault can be found with the view formulated by the Tribunal in assessing the income of the deceased Tarsem Chand, who died at the age of 65 years, @ Rs.6,000/- per month.

¶20

Counsel for the appellants is right in contending that nothing has been awarded on account of loss of estate. Accordingly, the award is modified to the extent that the claimants are held entitled for an amount of Rs.15,000/- on account of loss of estate. Rest of the award is maintained.

¶21

With the aforesaid modification in the impugned award, the

¶22

appeal is disposed off.

¶23

April 27, 2026	(P	ankaj Jain)
Dpr		Judge
Whether speaking/reasoned	: Yes/No
Whether reportable	: Yes/No

¶24

DEEPAK KUMAR 2026.04.29 15:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Kaushalya Devi and Ors. v. Bikkar Singh @ Kala and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kaushalya Devi and Ors. v. Bikkar Singh @ Kala and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kuldeep Vs Vikram Singh and Ors.

Nand Kishore Vs Rani Devi

Bhajanpreet Kaur Vs Nitish Singla, Pcs

(O&M) Ajmer Kaur and Anr. Vs Jasbir Kaur

Bharto Devi etc. Vs Raj Kala etc.

Jagdish Kumar Vs Vatika City Apartment Owners Association and Anr.