Paramjit Kaur v. Amarjeet Singh
- 1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision: 29.04.2026 PARAMJIT KAUR ....APPELLANT
VERSUS
AMARJEET SINGH ...RESPONDENT
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHVIR SINGH RATHOR
Present:
Mr. Manvi Arora, Amicus Curiae for the appellant.
Mr. Suvir Dewan, Advocate for respondent No.3-Insurance Company.
YASHVIR SINGH RATHOR 1.
The matter is being taken up in the post lunch session. 2.
This appeal has been instituted against the Award dated 08.06.2002 for enhancement of the compensation awarded in MACT Case No.49 of 2000 decided by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bathinda (for short "Tribunal") in a petition under Section 163-A of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as 'Act') vide which a sum of Rs.1,75,000/- has been awarded as compensation to the claimants alongwith interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing of claim petition till realization on account of the death of Amar Singh in a motor vehicular accident.
2.
From the pleadings of parties, following issues were framed by the learned Tribunal:- "1.
Whether Amar Singh died in a motor vehicle accident involving jeep No.PJO-440 as alleged?OPA 2.
If issue No.1 is proved, whether the claimants are entitled to receive compensation by way of damages, if so to how much amount and against whom?
- 23.
Relief."
3.
Thereafter, the parties led evidence in support of their case. 4.
After hearing the parties and going through the material on the file, the learned Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.1,75,000/- as compensation to the claimants, on account of death of Amar Singh along with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of claim petition till realization. 5.
Feeling aggrieved, the appeal in hand has been preferred. The material on file has been perused and parties have been heard. 6.
The only issue required to be determined in the present appeal relates to the assessment/enhancement of compensation. Therefore, the entire facts regarding the manner of accident are not required to be reproduced in detail, as the Tribunal has already held that the accident in question had taken place on account of use of vehicle bearing No.PJO-440 driven by respondent No.1, owned by respondent No.2 and insured with respondent No.3 and insurer of the above-said vehicle was held liable to pay the compensation to the claimants. No appeal or cross-objections have been filed by respondents, challenging the said finding and accordingly finding on issue No.1 is not required to be interfered with so far as liability of respondents is concerned.
7.
Hon'ble Supreme Court in 2023 ACJ 631 Ram Murti & Ors. Vs. Punjab State Electricity Board has held as under:- "7. The provisions of Section 140 which formed a part of Chapter 10 of the Motor Vehicles Act 1988 were omitted by Act 32 of 2019. Simultaneously, Chapter 11 was substituted of which Section 164 provides for payment of compensation in the case of death in the amount of Rs.5,00,000/- and in the case of grievous hurt of
- 3Rs.2,50,000/-.
8. We are inclined to give the appellants the benefit of the beneficial provisions which have been enacted by Parliament. Hence, in modification of the order of the High Court, we direct that the appellants shall be entitled to an amount of Rs.5,00,000/- as compensation. However, if the amount of Rs.50,000 which has been awarded by the High Court has already been paid over, the balance (or the entirety of Rs.5,00,000/- if no amount has been paid) shall be paid over to the appellants by 30 November 2022." 8.
In Ram Murti's case (supra), the petition was filed under Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, which had been dismissed. The accident had taken place when Section 164 of Act had not come into existence. However, Hon'ble Supreme Court observed that the Motor Vehicles Act is a beneficial provision and applied the beneficial provision of Section 164 of Motor Vehicles Act retrospectively in cases of no-fault liability under Section 163-A and awarded a lump sum compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- to the claimants in a death case. 9.
In the present case, the accident took place on 20.03.2000, resulting in death of Amar Singh on account of use of vehicle. The claim petition was filed under Section 163-A of the Act. Now Section 164 of the Act has replaced the previous Section 163-A vide Act No.32 of 2019 w.e.f. 09.08.2019 under which claimants are entitled to compensation to the extent of Rs.5,00,000/-. Accordingly, in view law laid down in Ram Murti's case (supra), it is held that the claimants are also entitled to compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- on account of death of Amar Singh as against Rs.1,75,000/- awarded by the Tribunal along with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of claim petition till realization. 10.
As a result of the aforesaid discussion, the present appeal is partly
- 4allowed and the appellants are held entitled to enhanced compensation of Rs.3,25,000/- (Rs.5,00,000/- - Rs.1,75,000/-) along with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of claim petition i.e. 27.09.2000 till realization payable by respondent-Insurance Company on the same terms as has been ordered by the Tribunal.
11.
Registry is directed to email the authenticated copy of the award to the respondents/Insurance Companies in terms of directions issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Writ Petition (Civil) No.534 of 2020 titled Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Versus Union of India and others, decided on 16.03.2021 and Insurance Companies shall comply with the directions as issued under Clause (F) of the said judgment.
12.
Pending misc. application (s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. 29.04.2026 (YASHVIR SINGH RATHOR) Vishal Vardhan JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned. :
Yes/No Whether reportable.
:
Yes/No