Neutral Citation No.

: 2023:PHHC:107450
FAO-3236-2007 -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
101
FAO-3236-2007
Decided on : 17.08.2023

Daya @ Dayawanti
. . . Appellant(s)
Versus
Arjun and others
. . . Respondent(s)

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH

PRESENT: Mr. Bhisham K. Majoka, Advocate

the appellant(s).

Mr. R.C. Kapoor, Advocate

for respondent No.3 – Insurance Company.
****

SANJAY VASHISTH, J. (Oral)

1. The present appeal has been filed by the

appellant/petitioner/claimant (hereinafter referred as ‘claimant’) in MACT

Case No. 62 of 2005, dated 19.04.2005, for modification of award dated

28.02.2007, passed by Ld. Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Karnal

(hereinafter referred to as ‘Ld. Tribunal’) by way of seeking enhancement of

amount of compensation, on account of death of deceased - Sarwan Kumar.

2. There was only one claimant in the MACT case that is Smt.

Daya alias Dayawanti, who is widow of the deceased – Sarwan Kumar. In

the present appeal before this Court, she is seeking enhancement of

compensation awarded by Ld. Tribunal on account of death of her husband

Sarwan Kumar in a motor vehicular accident.

3. Briefly stated facts of the case are that on 10.01.2005, at 05:00

p.m., deceased left for Delhi in his truck bearing No. HR-38-BG-5027 from

Punjab. Near brick kiln of village Sambli on Dhand to Karnal Road, at about
JAWALA RAM
2023.08.22 18:51
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
 Neutral Citation No. : 2023:PHHC:107450
FAO-3236-2007 -2-
09:00 p.m., one canter bearing registration No. HR-64-0903 coming on the

left side of the road dashed into the truck of the deceased. Sarwan Kumar

died on the spot. It was contended that the said canter was being driven in a

rash and negligent manner.

4. Claimant filed a claim petition under Section 166 and Section

140 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 for seeking compensation of

Rs.20,00,000/- on account of death of her husband in the motor vehicular

accident. However, after going through the record, appreciating the

evidences, examining the witnesses and hearing the arguments of both the

sides, Ld. Tribunal assessed the age of the deceased as 49 years and 8

months, his monthly income as Rs.3,500/-, deducted 1/3 rd on account of his

personal expenses, applied the multiplier of 13, granted Rs.5,000/- as

spousal consortium, Rs.10,000/- as funeral expenses and accordingly,

awarded total compensation to the claimant to the tune of Rs.3,79,000/-

payable by respondents severally and jointly with interest @7.5% per annum

from the date of filing of the petition till its actual realization.

Appellant/Petitioner/Claimant has filed the present petition,

seeking enhancement of the compensation as awarded by the Ld. Tribunal.

5. While addressing arguments, Counsel for the appellants submits

that the Ld. Tribunal has erred in determining the monthly salary of the

deceased - Sarwan Kumar; failed to enhance the income on account of future

prospects; has deducted personal expenses on the higher side and failed to

grant any compensation on account of loss of estate.

6. On the other hand, Ld. Counsel for Respondent No.3 –

Insurance Company, submits that the Ld. Tribunal has rightly determined

the monthly salary of the deceased as per prevailing wages of labourers at

JAWALA RAM
2023.08.22 18:51
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
 Neutral Citation No. : 2023:PHHC:107450
FAO-3236-2007 -3-
the time of accident and there is no need to interfere in the amount of

compensation awarded by the Ld. Tribunal.

7. This Court is of the view that income of the deceased who was

a truck driver should have been assessed in accordance with the DC rates

prevalent at the time of the accident which were Rs. 5,812.75/- per month as

on date of accident i.e. 10.01.2005.

8. Learned counsel for the appellant/claimant vehemently argues

that in view of the law laid by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Smt. Sarla Verma

and others v. Delhi Transport Corporation and another, 2009(3) RCR

(Civil) 77 : Law Finder Doc ID #188882, there being only one dependent of

the deceased that is widow of the deceased, a deduction of half (1/2) on

account of personal expenses of the deceased should be made. This court has

thoroughly examined the verdict of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the

aforementioned 'Sarla Verma' case (supra) and observes that there is no

explicit indication regarding the deduction to be applied in instances where

the deceased was married and has only one dependent. Thus, in such

circumstances, it is the discretion of the court to apply the deduction

according to the peculiar facts & circumstances of the case.

In the case in hand, sole claimant is a widow. With the

unfortunate demise of her husband, the widow has been thrusted into a

position of considerable responsibility, as she now must not only ensure her

own well-being but also shoulder the care and support of her family. This

transition would have brought about an array of challenging responsibilities

to her, signifying a profound and demanding phase of adaptation and

resilience.

A homemaker shoulders a myriad of responsibilities that

JAWALA RAM
2023.08.22 18:51
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
 Neutral Citation No. : 2023:PHHC:107450
FAO-3236-2007 -4-
encompass a diverse range of tasks. From managing household chores to

nurturing relationships and maintaining a harmonious living environment,

their role is ceaseless and demanding. Operating tirelessly around the clock,

a homemaker's dedication is undeniable. The contribution of a homemaker

to the intricate fabric of daily life is immeasurable and deserves profound

acknowledgment.

Thus, being a homemaker, widow – Daya @ Dayawanti has to

not only look after herself, but also manage her home too. If a deduction of

½ (half) is made to the income of the deceased, it will bring profound

challenges in the life of the widow and will cause extreme hardship to her.

Thus, in the interest of justice, this Court is of the view that

deduction for personal expenses in the present case should be 1/3 rd of the

income of the deceased and sole claimant – widow should be entitled to the

remaining 2/3rd of the income of the deceased.

9. Rest of the parameters are assessed and calculated in

accordance with the judgment of this Court titled as Sangtari Muleem v.

Karnail Singh, (FAO No. 2538 of 2006, D/d. 07.07.2023) : Law Finder

Doc Id # 2270482, which is in consonance with the settled proposition of

law laid down by the Apex Court in National Insurance Company Limited

v. Pranay Sethi and Ors., 2017(4) RCR (Civil) 1009 : Law Finder Doc Id

#918174, and Smt. Sarla Verma’s case (supra) and Smt. Anjali and others

v. Lokendra Rathod and others, 2023 (1) R.C.R. (Civil) 229 : Law Finder

Doc Id #2081014. For the sake of convenience, a comparative table of the

compensation as assessed and calculated by Ld. Tribunal and this Court is

produced below in a tabular form:

JAWALA RAM
2023.08.22 18:51
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
 Neutral Citation No. : 2023:PHHC:107450
FAO-3236-2007 -5-

Sr. Head Compensation Compensation Awarded by

No. awarded by Ld. High Court
Tribunal
1. Income Rs. 3,500/- p.m. Rs.5,812.75/- p.m.
2. Future Prospects NIL Rs.1453/- (i.e. 25% of the
income)
3. Deduction towards Rs. 270/- Rs.2,422/- [i.e. 1/3rd of (Rs.
personal expenses (1/3rd of Rs. 5,812.75/- + Rs. 1,453/-)]
3,500/-)
4. Total Annual Income Rs.28,000/- Rs. 58,116/- [i.e. 2/3rd of (Rs.
(Rs. 2,333.33 x 12) 5,812/- + Rs. 1,453) x 12]
5. Multiplier 13 13
6. Loss of Dependency Rs.3,64,000/- Rs.7,55,508/-
(i.e. Rs. 58,116/- x 13)
7. Funeral Expenses Rs.10,000/- Rs.25,000/-
8. Loss of Estate NIL Rs.20,000/-
9. Loss of Spousal Rs.5,000/- Rs.44,000/-
Consortium
10. Loss of Parental NIL NIL
Consortium to each
of the three children
11. Loss of Filial NIL NIL
Consortium to parents
i.e. mother and father
of the deceased
12. Total Compensation Rs.3,79,000/- Rs.8,44,508/-
to be Paid

10. Counsel for the appellants further submits that the rate of

interest awarded by the Ld. Tribunal i.e. at 7.5% per annum from the date of

filing of the claim petition till its realization is worth to be maintained.

However, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No.3 -

Insurance Co., submits that the rate of interest should not be over the

awarded amount and therefore, it should not be more than 6% per annum.

11. I have gone through the judgments cited by counsel for the

appellant (petitioner/claimant) and thus, I deem it appropriate to maintain the

rate of interest at 7.5% per annum.

12. Thus, keeping in view the aim of this beneficial legislation of

JAWALA RAM
2023.08.22 18:51
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
 Neutral Citation No. : 2023:PHHC:107450
FAO-3236-2007 -6-
providing relief to the victims or their families, the total compensation

payable to the appellant (petitioner/claimant) is Rs.8,44,508/- along with

interest at 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of claim petition till the

date of payment of compensation to the appellants (petitioner/claimant).

13. Needless to mention that out of the total payable compensation

amount, already paid amount (if any) in compliance to the impugned award

would be adjusted.

Therefore, by partly modifying the award, appeal is allowed

with the terms indicated here-above.

(SANJAY VASHISTH)
JUDGE
August 17, 2023
J.Ram

Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No

Whether Reportable: Yes/No

JAWALA RAM
2023.08.22 18:51
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document