Kela Devi And ORS v. Inder Singh And ORS
!
"# !$% &'
......Appellants Vs.
$% & (#$)* !$% $+,* & ......Respondents
Reserved on: 20.02.2026
Pronounced on: 23.02.2026 Uploaded on : 25.02.2026
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA
Present:
! "# $ **** SUDEEPTI SHARMA J.
1.
The present appeal has been preferred against the award dated 04.09.2012 passed in the claim petition filed under Section 166f the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (in short '1988 Act'), by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Panipat % & ' ( )* # # + # , -.
.../ + 012 # 3 + 4 .,. .55 # 6 ##
($ ' (
6 ( 7( $ (((( -
(- ( 8 ' # # ($ ' ( ( ' $ (
## (
9
! "# $ #$ +
+$(
## ($ ' ( +$(+ ' $ # , !
( (-
-.
( 1
)( #" Sarla Verma Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and Another / 0 (23& 4 +2&, !' '
## # :
;30 !
"# $
%
& #$
$ !
$ ' ()*+,
-+$'()*.,
./$
' ()*0,
! !
$
1 $
$ 023
!
$
$
$
(,
"
4$ $
"
1 $ $ $ $
$
$ 023
!
023
% $
$
' $ !
'
" '
* * * * * * 42.
# (., (
5$ "#
# ,$
)6( )0-2 -)-0 ,$ $ 7')8 -/+2 $7')/+)+0 $7')0+/.2
$7')..).0 $ 7')+./02
$ $
$7'))0)00 $7'90//2 $7'8 /)/0 7'0//82
-
)( # " National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi & Ors. / 6
( 17 5
511 518 51<4 5=<< + :
%* > + ? # # @ %3*
# + + @ %"* + ( $ +# @
%>* ( + #$ # ?
@ %A* B + +: # (@ #$ ? $ ' +# :
;52. : conventional heads $ !
;
<
1 ; -0$222 !
$ ; )$22$222 ; )$22$222 !
;
= $
$
$
> " $
& : &
!$ " $
$ !
$
"
"
1 & $
" $ " ! 1 $ $ $ !
; )0$222$ ; .2$222 ; )0$222
? ' & '
" & )23
@ @ @ @ @ 59.3 $ 023
$
.2 $
+23$ .202 1 02/2 $ )03
:
!
59.4 1 ' (,
!
$ .23
6
.2 : -03
.202 )23 02/2
!
59.5 4
$ !
$
+2+-
A
59.6.
A C
.-
59.7
59.8 ; $ $ $ !
; )0$222$ ; .2$222 ; )0$222
)23 <
)( # " !)4!
$ &!
$'2&!$8 +43!$9 -#4#, % :';
!$2 !4 ! #!'
*2*&2 !4
,* &'
/
7 (
5
+ (!& !
: &4! '23&! &!$!9 ( ,*#
(23&!
+ + # # :
7 E21 :# ? # F
<
1
$ G G
G
G$ G
G$ G
G
$ $ $ $ $
$
$ !
-) ) Spousal consortium
'
G
$ $ $ $
G
-) - Parental consortium
$ G
$
$ $ $
$
G
-) + Filial consortium
: "
#
0 $ $
#
7 ' H !
7
$
$
7A :
$
1
$ $
F
: : % #
% $
G G
F
< 1 $
$
;.2$222
= A perusal of the impugned award shows that the deceased was 37 years old at the time of the accident. Since, the factum of the age is not disputed, therefore, the learned Tribunal has rightly applied the multiplier of 15.
5.
₹ ( + -,..# # $+
(+( # 55 ! (+ + + ' ( +$ # ##
+
( # 7 7 + # ' ' ( +$ # ₹< 3 & 4+$,* 5
' ( +$5/8 ? Burthermore, the learned Tribunal has erred in not adding future prospects to the income of the deceased. Considering the age of the deceased (37 years) 40% is to be added as future prospects.
58
#+ ? # B# # + '
6 + "
-( 59 !
($ )( #" (+# '
04.09.2012 # +$ ' # # # :
Sr.
No.
Heads Compensation Awarded $!# 9 ,../ B09.2 5 <../ %9.29 ,..* >
? 5/8 5../ %1 8..C5/8* ' !# 9 ../ %1 8..
5..* , 5, >$ - ,1 .../ %9 ..C5 C5,* - DA 5, .../ < B A? 5, .../ = D" #
: ?9.
...
B :5?9.
...
5 .
.../ 5.
+ 5.
.../ 5.
+,!
+43 $'!,#+$ ';0< 1< =
%28,#+$
#
($' ( ';<6 < = $*!$8 % !4+2$, ';<1< = 0< 1< <6 < 5,
($ )(
#" Dara Singh @ Dhara Banjara Vs. Shyam Singh Varma 61 R.Valli and Others VS. Tamil Nandu State Transport Corporation (2022) 5 Supreme Court Cases 107 < # + 0=2 # ## + # E
51 The respondent No.2-Insurance Company is directed to deposit the enhanced amount along with interest at the rate of 9% with the Tribunal within a period of two months from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment. The Tribunal is directed to disburse the same to the appellantsclaimants in their bank accounts. The appellants-claimants are directed to furnish their bank account details to the Tribunal. 17.
+ %* $ ; ; 1
( (
F 7 +/ 7 +: G/ F ( : G