Mandeep Kaur And Another v. Sbi General Insurance Company Ltd And Another

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

FAO-623-2020 (O&M) Date of Decision : 09.04.2025 Mandeep Kaur and Another ....Appellants

VERSUS

SBI General Insurance Company Ltd. and Another ....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ALKA SARIN Present :

Mr. Umesh Kumar Kanwar, Advocate for the appellants. Ms. Manvi Verma, Advocate for Mr. Rajneesh Malhotra, Advocate for respondent No.1. ALKA SARIN, J. (Oral) 1.

Present appeal has been preferred by the claimant-appellants aggrieved by the quantum of compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jalandhar (hereinafter referred to as the 'Tribunal') vide award dated 27.09.2019 on account of death of Jaswinder Singh (hereinafter referred to as the 'deceased').

2.

Since the facts, as recorded in the impugned award passed by the Tribunal, are not in dispute, the same are not being reproduced herein for the sake of brevity.

3.

The Tribunal in the present case had awarded the following compensation :

Sr. No.

Heads Compensation Awarded Monthly income ₹8,078/- Annual income [₹8,078 X 12] = ₹96,936/- Deduction - 1/3rd [₹96,936 - 32,312] = ₹64,624/-

-2Future prospects @ 40% [₹64,624 + 25849] = ₹90,473/- Compensation after multiplier of 15 is applied [Rs.90,473 x 15] = ₹13,57,095/- Loss of estate ₹15,000/- Funeral expenses ₹15,000/- Loss of consortium [₹40,000 x 2] ₹80,000/- Total compensation ₹14,67,095/- (rounded off ₹14,67,100/-) Interest 7.5% per annum 4.

Learned counsel for the claimant-appellants would contend that though he does not challenge the deduction, multiplier and the addition of future prospects as applied by the Tribunal, however, the monthly income assessed by the Tribunal is on the lower side inasmuch as even the minimum wages for an unskilled worker at the relevant point of time were Rs.8,451/- per month. Learned counsel for the claimant-appellants would further contend that the amounts awarded under the conventional heads as well as under the head 'loss of consortium' are also not in accordance with the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. In support of his contention, he has relied upon the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of National Insurance Company Ltd. vs. Pranay Sethi & Ors. [(2017) 16 SCC 680], Magma General Insurance Company Limited vs. Nanu Ram alias Chuhru Ram & Ors. [(2018) 18 SCC 130] and N. Jayasree & Ors. vs. Cholamandalam M.S General Insurance Company Ltd. [2021(4) RCR (Civil) 642].

5.

Per contra, learned counsel for respondent No.1-Insurance Company has vehemently argued that sufficient amount has already been

-3awarded as compensation in the present case and that there is no scope of any enhancement.

6.

Heard.

7.

In the present case, no appeal has been filed by respondent No.1-Insurance Company. Since there is no challenge to the deduction, multiplier and the addition towards loss of future prospects as applied by the Tribunal, the same are accordingly maintained. The income of the deceased as assessed by the Tribunal, in the opinion of this Court, is on the lower side inasmuch as the minimum wages for an unskilled worker at the relevant point of time were ₹8,451/- and hence the income of the deceased is assessed as ₹8,451/- per month. Further, the amounts awarded under the conventional heads and under the head 'loss of consortium' are not as per the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of Pranay Sethi (supra), Magma General Insurance Company Limited (supra) and N.

Jayasree (supra) and hence the claimant-appellants would be entitled to Rs.18,000/- (Rs.15,000+20% increase) towards loss of estate and Rs.18,000/- (Rs.15,000+20% increase) towards funeral expenses and the claimantappellants would also be entitled to Rs.48,000/- each (Rs.40,000+20% increase) towards loss of consortium.

8.

Accordingly, the reworked compensation is as under : Sr. No.

Heads Compensation Awarded Monthly Income ₹8,451/- Annual Income ₹1,01,412/- [₹8,451 x 12] Deduction - 1/3rd ₹67,608/- [₹101412 - 33804] Future Prospects - 40% ₹94,652/- [₹67608 + 27044]

-4Multiplier - 15 ₹14,19,780/- [₹94652 x 15] Loss of estate ₹18,000/- Funeral expenses ₹18,000/- Loss of consortium (i) Parental ₹48,000/- (ii) Spousal ₹48,000/- (Total ₹96,000/-) Total Compensation ₹15,51,780/- 9.

The amount in excess of and over and above the amount awarded by the Tribunal shall also attract interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the realization of the entire amount. 10.

In view of the decision by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Parminder Singh vs. Honey Goyal & Ors. [2025 INSC 361 : Civil Appeal No.4299 of 2025 arising out of SLP (C) No.4484 of 2020 decided on 18.03.2025], after calculation of the enhanced amount, the same be transferred by the Insurance Company in the bank account(s) of the claimants within six weeks from today and the apportionment thereof shall be as per the percentage directed by the Tribunal and the share of the minor claimant (appellant No.2 herein) shall be kept in a fixed deposit by the Bank concerned. The particulars of the bank account(s) alongwith the requisite documents(s) in support thereof shall be furnished by the claimants to the Insurance Company within a period of two weeks from the date of this order and needful shall be done by the Insurance Company after verification thereof within four weeks thereafter alongwith up-to-date interest. The compliance shall be reported by the Bank to the Tribunal concerned.

-511.

In view of the above discussion, the award passed by the Tribunal is modified and the present appeal stands allowed accordingly. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed off. ( ALKA SARIN ) 09.04.2025 JUDGE jk NOTE: Whether speaking/non-speaking: Speaking Whether reportable: YES/NO