Navneet Kaur Preety Reehal And Others v. Sukhwinder Singh And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

FAO-6797-2023 (O&M) Date of Decision : 11.09.2025 Navneet Kaur Preety Reehal and Others ... Appellants

Versus

Sukhwinder Singh and Others ... Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ALKA SARIN Present :

Ms. Kritika Sharma, Advocate for Mr. Vivek Suri, Advocate for the appellants.

Mr. D.K. Prajapati, Advocates for respondent No.3. ALKA SARIN, J. (Oral) 1.

The present appeal has been preferred by the claimant-appellants aggrieved by the quantum of compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Fatehgarh Sahib (hereinafter referred to as 'Tribunal') vide the impugned award dated 12.09.2023 on account of death of Gurpreet Singh Reehal @ Sony (hereinafter referred to as the 'deceased') in a motor vehicle accident which occurred on 10.01.2021.

2.

Since the factum of the accident is not in dispute, the facts are not being adverted to for the sake of brevity. 3.

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

Sr. No.

Heads Compensation Awarded Monthly income ₹10,000/- Future prospects 25% [₹10,000 + 2,500] = ₹12,500/-

-2Deduction - 1/4th [₹12,500 - 3,125] = ₹9,375/- Loss of dependency after applying the multiplier of 14 [₹9,375 x 12 x 14] = ₹15,75,000/- Funeral expenses ₹16,500/- Loss of estate ₹16,500/- Loss of consortium ₹44,000/- Total Compensation ₹16,52,000/- Interest 7.5% per annum 4.

Learned counsel for the claimant-appellants would contend that though he does not challenge the income, deduction, multiplier and the addition towards loss of future prospects as assessed by the Tribunal, however, she has contended that the compensation awarded under the conventional heads as well as under the head 'loss of consortium' is also not in accordance with the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. In support of her contention, she 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, the learned counsel for respondent No.3-Insurance Company has contended that sufficient amount has already been awarded as compensation in the present case and that there is no scope of any enhancement.

6.

Heard.

7.

Admittedly, no appeal has been preferred by the Insurance Company. Since there is no challenge to the income, deduction, multiplier and

-3the addition towards loss of future prospects as assessed by the Tribunal, the same are maintained. The compensation awarded by the Tribunal under the conventional heads as well as under the head 'loss of consortium' is not in accordance with 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) hence, the claimant-appellants would be entitled to ₹18,000/- (₹15,000+20% increase) towards loss of estate and ₹18,000/- (₹15,000+20% increase) towards funeral expenses and further to an amount of ₹48,000/- each under the head 'loss of consortium'. Accordingly, the reworked compensation is as under :

Sr.No.

Heads Compensation Awarded Monthly Income ₹10,000/- Annual Income ₹1,20,000/- [₹10,000 x 12] Deduction - 1/4th ₹90,000/- [₹1,20,000 - ₹30,000] Future Prospects - 25% ₹1,12,500/- [₹90,000 + ₹22,500] Multiplier - 14 ₹15,75,000/- [₹1,12,500 x 14] Loss of estate ₹18,000/- Funeral expenses ₹18,000/- Loss of consortium (i) Parental [₹48,000/- x 2] ₹96,000/- (ii) Filial [₹48,000/- x 1] ₹48,000/- (iii) Spousal ₹48,000/- (Total ₹1,92,000/-) Total Compensation ₹18,03,000/- 8.

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. 9.

In view of the decision by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Parminder Singh Vs. Honey Goyal & Ors. [AIR 2025 SC 1713 = 2025 SCC OnLine SC 567], after calculation of the enhanced amount, the same be

-4transferred 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 claimants (appellant Nos.2 and 3 herein) shall be kept in fixed deposits 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. 10.

In view of the above discussion, the present appeal is allowed and the award passed by the Tribunal stands modified accordingly. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed off. 11.09.2025 jk ( ALKA SARIN ) JUDGE NOTE: Whether speaking/non-speaking: Speaking Whether reportable: YES/NO