Punjab-Haryana High Court
United India Insurance Company Limited vs Bimla Sharma & Others on 24 April, 2026
Author: Sudeepti Sharma
Bench: Sudeepti Sharma
FAO-1325-2018 (O&M)
FAO-1326-2018 (O&M)
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
1. FAO-1325-2018 (O&M)
UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED
......Appellant
Vs.
BIMLA SHARMA AND ORS.
.....Respondents
2. FAO-1326-2018 (O&M)
UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED
......Appellant
Vs.
BALA AND ORS.
.....Respondents
Reserved on : 20.03.2026
Pronounced on: 24.04.2026
Uploaded on: 27.04.2026
Whether only the operative part of the judgment is pronounced? NO
Whether full judgment is pronounced? YES
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA
Present: Mr. Diwan S. Adlakha, Advocate
for the appellant-Insurance Company.
Mr. Sagar Aggarwal, Advocate
for Mr. Ashit Malik, Advocate
for respondent Nos.1 and 2 (in FAO-1325-2018).
Mr. Hitesh Chauhan, Advocate
for Mr. Suresh Kumar Kaushik, Advocate
for respondent Nos.1 to 3 (in FAO-1326-2018).
SUDEEPTI SHARMA, J.
1. The present appeals have been preferred by Insurance Company
against the award dated 02.11.2017 passed by the learned Motor Accident
MOHD AYUB Claims Tribunal, Karnal (for short, ‘the Tribunal’) in the claim petition filed
2026.04.27 18:00
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this order/judgment.
FAO-1325-2018 (O&M)
FAO-1326-2018 (O&M)
-2-
under Section 166 and 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 on quantum of
compensation granted to the claimants to the tune of Rs.43,49,301/- along
with interest @ 6 % per annum, on account of death of Rajinder Sharma in a
Motor Vehicular Accident, occurred on 03.09.2015 on the ground that
compensation awarded is on higher side.
2. As sole issue for determination in the present appeal is confined
to quantum of compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal, a detailed
narration of the facts of the case is not required to be reproduced here for the
sake of brevity.
SUBMISSIONS OF LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE PARTIES
3. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant-Insurance
Company contends that the learned Tribunal has erred in law by failing to
deduct the amount received by the dependants of the deceased under the
Haryana Compassionate Assistance to the Dependants of Deceased
Government Employees Rules, 2006. He further contends that in view of the
settled legal position, the said amount is liable to be deducted while
computing compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, and
consequently, the awarded compensation deserves to be reduced. He
furthermore contends that major son and daughter were wrongly considered
as dependant on the income of the deceased. Therefore, he prays that present
appeal be allowed and compensation be reduced as per the settled law.
4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent Nos.1 to 3 (in
FAO-1326-2018 and respondent Nos. 1 and 2 in FAO-1325-2018 contends
that compensation awarded is on the lower side. He furthermore contends
MOHD AYUB
2026.04.27 18:00
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this order/judgment.
FAO-1325-2018 (O&M)
FAO-1326-2018 (O&M)
-3-
that they have preferred separate appeals seeking enhancement of
compensation. He, therefore, prays that the present appeal be dismissed.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the
whole record of this case with his able assistance.
SETTLED LAW ON COMPENSATION
6. Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sarla Verma Vs. Delhi
Transport Corporation and Another [(2009) 6 Supreme Court Cases 121],
laid down the law on assessment of compensation and the relevant paras of
the same are as under:-
“30. Though in some cases the deduction to be made towards
personal and living expenses is calculated on the basis of units
indicated in Trilok Chandra, the general practice is to apply
standardised deductions. Having a considered several
subsequent decisions of this Court, we are of the view that
where the deceased was married, the deduction towards
personal and living expenses of the deceased, should be one-
third (1/3rd) where the number of dependent family members is
2 to 3, one-fourth (1/4th) where the number of dependent family
members is 4 to 6, and one-fifth (1/5th) where the number of
dependent family members exceeds six.
31. Where the deceased was a bachelor and the claimants are
the parents, the deduction follows a different principle. In
regard to bachelors, normally, 50% is deducted as personal and
living expenses, because it is assumed that a bachelor would
tend to spend more on himself. Even otherwise, there is also the
MOHD AYUB
2026.04.27 18:00
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this order/judgment.
FAO-1325-2018 (O&M)
FAO-1326-2018 (O&M)
-4-possibility of his getting married in a short time, in which event
the contribution to the parent(s) and siblings is likely to be cut
drastically. Further, subject to evidence to the contrary, the
father is likely to have his own income and will not be
considered as a dependant and the mother alone will be
considered as a dependant. In the absence of evidence to the
contrary, brothers and sisters will not be considered as
dependants, because they will either be independent and
earning, or married, or be dependent on the father.
32. Thus even if the deceased is survived by parents and
siblings, only d the mother would be considered to be a
dependant, and 50% would be treated as the personal and living
expenses of the bachelor and 50% as the contribution to the
family. However, where the family of the bachelor is large and
dependent on the income of the deceased, as in a case where he
has a widowed mother and large number of younger non-
earning sisters or brothers, his personal and living expenses
may be restricted to one-third and contribution to the family will
be taken as two-third.
* * * * * *
42. We therefore hold that the multiplier to be used should be as
mentioned in Column (4) of the table above (prepared by
applying Susamma Thomas³, Trilok Chandra and Charlie),
which starts with an operative multiplier of 18 (for the age
groups of 15 to 20 and 21 to 25 years), reduced by one unit for
MOHD AYUB
2026.04.27 18:00
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this order/judgment.
FAO-1325-2018 (O&M)
FAO-1326-2018 (O&M)
-5-every five years, that is M-17 for 26 to 30 years, M-16 for 31 to
35 years, M-15 for 36 to 40 years, M-14 for 41 to 45 years, and
M-13 for 46 to 50 years, then reduced by two units for every five
years, that is, M-11 for 51 to 55 years, M-9 for 56 to 60 years,
M-7 for 61 to 65 years and M-5 for 66 to 70 years.
7. Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of National Insurance
Company Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi & Ors. [(2017) 16 SCC 680] has clarified
the law under Sections 166, 163-A and 168 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988,
on the following aspects:-
(A) Deduction of personal and living expenses to determine
multiplicand;
(B) Selection of multiplier depending on age of deceased;
(C) Age of deceased on basis for applying multiplier;
(D) Reasonable figures on conventional heads, namely, loss of
estate, loss of consortium and funeral expenses, with escalation;
(E) Future prospects for all categories of persons and for
different ages: with permanent job; self-employed or fixed
salary.
The relevant portion of the judgment is reproduced as under:-
“52. As far as the conventional heads are concerned, we
find it difficult to agree with the view expressed in
Rajesh². It has granted Rs.25,000 towards funeral
expenses, Rs 1,00,000 towards loss of consortium and Rs
1,00,000 towards loss of care and guidance for minor
children. The head relating to loss of care and minor
MOHD AYUB
2026.04.27 18:00
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this order/judgment.
FAO-1325-2018 (O&M)
FAO-1326-2018 (O&M)
-6-children does not exist. Though Rajesh refers to Santosh
Devi, it does not seem to follow the same. The
conventional and traditional heads, needless to say,
cannot be determined on percentage basis because that
would not be an acceptable criterion. Unlike
determination of income, the said heads have to be
quantified. Any quantification must have a reasonable
foundation. There can be no dispute over the fact that
price index, fall in bank interest, escalation of rates in
many a field have to be noticed. The court cannot remain
oblivious to the same. There has been a thumb rule in this
aspect. Otherwise, there will be extreme difficulty in
determination of the same and unless the thumb rule is
applied, there will be immense variation lacking any kind
of consistency as a consequence of which, the orders
passed by the tribunals and courts are likely to be
unguided. Therefore, we think it seemly to fix reasonable
sums. It seems to us that reasonable figures on
conventional heads, namely, loss of estate, loss of
consortium and funeral expenses should be Rs.15,000,
Rs.40,000 and Rs.15,000 respectively. The principle of
revisiting the said heads is an acceptable principle. But
the revisit should not be fact-centric or quantum-centric.
We think that it would be condign that the amount that we
have quantified should be enhanced on percentage basis
MOHD AYUB
2026.04.27 18:00
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this order/judgment.
FAO-1325-2018 (O&M)
FAO-1326-2018 (O&M)
-7-in every three years and the enhancement should be at the
rate of 10% in a span of three years. We are disposed to
hold so because that will bring in consistency in respect
of those heads.
* * * * *
59.3. While determining the income, an addition of 50%
of actual salary to the income of the deceased towards
future prospects, where the deceased had a permanent job
and was below the age of 40 years, should be made. The
addition should be 30%, if the age of the deceased was
between 40 to 50 years. In case the deceased was
between the age of 50 to 60 years, the addition should be
15%. Actual salary should be read as actual salary less
tax.
59.4. In case the deceased was self-employed (or) on a
fixed salary, an addition of 40% of the established income
should be the warrant where the deceased was below the
age of 40 years. An addition of 25% where the deceased
was between the age of 40 to 50 years and 10% where the
deceased was between the age of 50 to 60 years should be
regarded as the necessary method of computation. The
established income means the income minus the tax
component.
59.5. For determination of the multiplicand, the
deduction for personal and living expenses, the tribunals
MOHD AYUB
2026.04.27 18:00
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this order/judgment.
FAO-1325-2018 (O&M)
FAO-1326-2018 (O&M)
-8-and the courts shall be guided by paras 30 to 32 of Sarla
Verma⁴ which we have reproduced hereinbefore.
59.6. The selection of multiplier shall be as indicated in
the Table in Sarla Verma¹ read with para 42 of that
judgment.
59.7. The age of the deceased should be the basis for
applying the multiplier.
59.8. Reasonable figures on conventional heads, namely,
loss of estate, loss of consortium and funeral expenses
should be Rs 15,000, Rs 40,000 and Rs 15,000
respectively. The aforesaid amounts should be enhanced
at the rate of 10% in every three years.”
8. Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Magma General
Insurance Company Limited Vs. Nanu Ram alias Chuhru Ram &
Others [2018(18) SCC 130] after considering Sarla Verma (supra) and
Pranay Sethi (Supra) has settled the law regarding consortium. Relevant
paras of the same are reproduced as under:-
“21. A Constitution Bench of this Court in Pranay Sethi²
dealt with the various heads under which compensation is
to be awarded in a death case. One of these heads is loss
of consortium. In legal parlance, “consortium” is a
compendious term which encompasses “spousal
consortium”, “parental consortium”, and “filial
consortium”. The right to consortium would include the
company, care, help, comfort, guidance, solace and
MOHD AYUB
2026.04.27 18:00
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this order/judgment.
FAO-1325-2018 (O&M)
FAO-1326-2018 (O&M)
-9-affection of the deceased, which is a loss to his family.
With respect to a spouse, it would include sexual relations
with the deceased spouse.
21.1. Spousal consortium is generally defined as rights
pertaining to the relationship of a husband-wife which
allows compensation to the surviving spouse for loss of
“company, society, cooperation, affection, and aid of the
other in every conjugal relation”.
21.2. Parental consortium is granted to the child upon
the premature death of a parent, for loss of “parental aid,
protection, affection, society, discipline, guidance and
training”.
21.3. Filial consortium is the right of the parents to
compensation in the case of an accidental death of a
child. An accident leading to the death of a child causes
great shock and agony to the parents and family of the
deceased. The greatest agony for a parent is to lose their
child during their lifetime. Children are valued for their
love, affection, companionship and their role in the family
unit.
22. Consortium is a special prism reflecting changing
norms about the status and worth of actual relationships.
Modern jurisdictions world-over have recognised that the
value of a child’s consortium far exceeds the economic
MOHD AYUB
value of the compensation awarded in the case of the
2026.04.27 18:00
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this order/judgment.
FAO-1325-2018 (O&M)
FAO-1326-2018 (O&M)
-10-
death of a child. Most jurisdictions therefore permit
parents to be awarded compensation under loss of
consortium on the death of a child. The amount awarded
to the parents is a compensation for loss of the love,
affection, care and companionship of the deceased child.
23. The Motor Vehicles Act is a beneficial legislation
aimed at providing relief to the victims or their families,
in cases of genuine claims. In case where a parent has
lost their minor child, or unmarried son or daughter, the
parents are entitled to be awarded loss of consortium
under the head of filial consortium. Parental consortium
is awarded to children who lose their parents in motor
vehicle accidents under the Act. A few High Courts have
awarded compensation on this count. However, there was
no clarity with respect to the principles on which
compensation could be awarded on loss of filial
consortium.
24. The amount of compensation to be awarded as consortium will
be governed by the principles of awarding compensation under
“loss of consortium” as laid down in Pranay Sethi². In the present
case, we deem it appropriate to award the father and the sister of
the deceased, an amount of Rs 40,000 each for loss of filial
consortium.
9. So far as the contention raised by the learned counsel for the
appellant-Insurance Company regarding deduction of the amount received
MOHD AYUB
under the Haryana Compassionate Assistance to the Dependants of Deceased
2026.04.27 18:00
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this order/judgment.
FAO-1325-2018 (O&M)
FAO-1326-2018 (O&M)
-11-
Government Employees Rules, 2006 is concerned, this Court finds
considerable merit in the said submission. This Court, in FAO No. 1558 of
2012, titled as “Balwan Singh And Others Vs Jagbir And Others“, decided
on 16.10.2025, has categorically held that where the dependants of a
deceased Government employee have already been extended compensatory
benefits by the employer under the aforesaid Rules, they are not entitled to
receive compensation to the same extent under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.
10. The relevant extract of the said judgment reads as under:
“11. Coming to the contention of the claimants
regarding the amount deducted from the total
compensation on the account of the amount received by
the dependents of the deceased under the Haryana
Compassionate Assistance to the Dependants of Deceased
Government Employees Rules, 2006, from the total
compensation awarded. This contention of the claimants
have no bearing in the eyes of law as it is settled principle
of law that deductions can be made in the compensation
to avoid double benefit to the claimants.
12. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Reliance General
Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Shashi Sharma, 2016(9) SCC 627
held that the dependents of the deceased already
benefitted by the compensatory amount received from the
employer under Haryana Compassionate Assistance to
the Dependants of Deceased Government Employees
Rules, 2006, will not be entitled to the same amount under
1988 Act.
13. The relevant portion of the judgment is reproduced
as under:
“15. Be that as it may, the term
compensation has not been defined in
MOHD AYUB
2026.04.27 18:00
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this order/judgment.
FAO-1325-2018 (O&M)
FAO-1326-2018 (O&M)
-12-the Act of 1988. By interpretative
process, it has been understood to
mean to recompense the claimants for
the possible loss suffered or likely to be
suffered due to sudden and untimely
death of their family member as a
result of motor accident. Two cardinal
principles run through the provisions
of the Motor Vehicles Act of 1988 in
the matter of determination of
compensation. Firstly, the measure of
compensation must be just and
adequate; and secondly, no double
benefit should be passed on to the
claimants in the matter of award of
compensation. Section 168 of the Act
of 1988 makes the first principle
explicit. Sub-section (1) of that
provision makes it clear that the
amount of compensation must be just.
The word “just” means – fair, adequate,
and reasonable. It has been derived
from the Latin word “justus”,
connoting right and fair. In para 7 of
State of Haryana & Anr. v. Jasbir Kaur
& Ors., 2003(4) RCR (Civil) 140 :
(2003) 7 SCC 484, it has been held
that expression “just” denotes that the
amount must be equitable, fair,
reasonable and not arbitrary. In para
16 of Smt. Sarla Verma & Ors. v. Delhi
Transport Corporation & Anr., 2009(3)
RCR (Civil) 77 : 2009(3) Recent Apex
MOHD AYUB
2026.04.27 18:00
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this order/judgment.
FAO-1325-2018 (O&M)
FAO-1326-2018 (O&M)
-13-
Judgments (R.A.J.) 373 : (2009) 6 SCC
121, this Court has observed that the
compensation “is not intended to be a
bonanza, largesse or source of profit”.
That however may depend upon facts
and circumstances of each case, as to
what amount would be a just
compensation.
16. The principle discernable from the
exposition in Helen C. Rebello’s case
(supra) is that if the amount “would be
due to the dependants of the deceased
even otherwise”, the same shall not be
deductible from the compensation
amount payable under the Act of 1988.
At the same time, it must be borne in
mind that loss of income is a
significant head under which
compensation is claimed in terms of
the Act of 1988. The component of
quantum of “loss of income”, inter alia,
can be “pay and wages” which
otherwise would have been earned by
the deceased employee if he had
survived the injury caused to him due
to motor accident. If the dependents of
the deceased employee, however, were
to be compensated by the employer in
that behalf, as is predicated by the
Rules of 2006 – to grant compassionate
assistance by way of ex-gratia
financial assistance on compassionate
grounds to the dependents of the
MOHD AYUB
2026.04.27 18:00
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this order/judgment.
FAO-1325-2018 (O&M)
FAO-1326-2018 (O&M)
-14-
deceased Government employee who
dies in harness, it is unfathomable that
the dependents can still be permitted to
claim the same amount as a possible
or likely loss of income to be suffered
by them to maintain a claim for
compensation under the Act of 1988.”
14. The same principle is reiterated in the latest
judgment passed by Apex Court in Krishna and others
Vs. Tek Chand and others, 2025(2) PLR 95.
Relevant paragraphs of the Krishna‘s case (supra)
are extracted hereinbelow:
“6. We find that the observations of
this Court in Sebastiani Lakra (supra)
distinguishing the case of Shashi
Sharma (supra) clearly applies to the
case in hand. It is observed that the
amount of Rs. 31,37,665/- (Rupees
Thirty One Lakhs, Thirty Seven
Thousand and Six Hundred and Sixty
Five only) was paid to the dependents
of the deceased-employee who are the
petitioners herein under the aforesaid
Rules since the said Rule was by way
of compassionate assistance owing to
the sudden death of the employee in
harness for any reason whatsoever
including as a result of a road traffic
accident. This is in order to
compensate the loss of the bread
earner of the family who dies in
harness.
MOHD AYUB
2026.04.27 18:00
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this order/judgment.
FAO-1325-2018 (O&M)
FAO-1326-2018 (O&M)
-15-In the case of a motor vehicle
accidents, when negligence is proved,
loss of dependency is compensated for
the very same reason. In our view,
there cannot be a duplication in
payments or a windfall owing to a
misfortune. In another words, on the
death of the person in harness, owing
to a road traffic accident the
dependents of a deceased cannot be
doubly benefited as opposed to those
who are dependents of a deceased who
dies owing to illness or any other
reason under the Rules formulated by
the Haryana Government.”
15. In light of the aforesaid authoritative
pronouncements, the deduction made by the learned
Tribunal towards the compassionate assistance is liable to
be upheld. Consequently, the claimants are entitled to the
compensation amount only to the extent of enhancement
made by this Court.”
11. In view of the settled legal position, it is beyond any pale of
doubt that the amount received by the dependants under the Haryana
Compassionate Assistance to the dependants of Deceased Government
Employees Rules, 2006, is required to be deducted while determining
compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.
12. Applying the aforesaid principle to the facts of the present case,
it is evident from the record that the widow of the deceased (Rajinder
MOHD AYUB
Sharma), shall continue to receive the same till the date on which the
2026.04.27 18:00
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this order/judgment.
FAO-1325-2018 (O&M)
FAO-1326-2018 (O&M)
-16-
deceased would have attained the age of superannuation. Consequently the
amount received by dependant of deceased under Haryana Compassionate
Assistance to the dependants of Deceased Government Employees Rules,
2006 is liable to be deducted.
13. Further perusal of the award reveals that major son and daughter
of the deceased were rightly awarded any compensation as they were rightly
considered dependant upon the income of the deceased. Reference at this
stage can be made to judgment passed by Hon’ble Supreme Court
in Sadhana Tomar & Others v. Ashok Kushwaha & Others, 2025 SCC
OnLine 554, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has expressly held that the term
legal representative should not be confined to those who inherit the estate but
extend to all persons who suffer on account of death of the deceased.
14. The relevant paras of judgment passed in Sadhana Tomar’s
case (supra) are reproduced as under:-
“13. This Court has clarified in the case of Meena Devi v.
Nunu Chand Mahto [(2023) 1 SCC 204], that the
objective of granting compensation under the Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988, is to ensure that just and fair
compensation is paid to the aggrieved party. Another
question which arose for our consideration, as for the
purpose of loss of dependency, the deduction of annual
income should be 1/3rd or 1/4th, as there are five
claimants. The Tribunal did not consider appellant Nos.4
and 5, namely, the father and the younger sister,
respectively, of the deceased as dependents, stating
therein that the father was not dependent on the income of
the deceased and since the father is alive, the younger
sister is also not dependent on the income of the
MOHD AYUB
2026.04.27 18:00
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this order/judgment.
FAO-1325-2018 (O&M)
FAO-1326-2018 (O&M)
-17-deceased. This Court in Gujarat SRTC v. Ramanbhai
Prabhatbhai [(1987) 3 SCC 234], observed that a legal
representative is one, who suffers on account of death of a
person due to a motor vehicle accident and need not
necessarily be a wife, husband, parent or child.
14. Recently in N. Jayasree v. Cholamandalam MS
General Insurance Company Ltd. [(2022) 14 SCC 712],
this Court observed that :
“16. In our view, the term “legal representative”
should be given a wider interpretation for the
purpose of Chapter XII of the MV Act and it should
not be confined only to mean the spouse, parents
and children of the deceased. As noticed above, the
MV Act is a benevolent legislation enacted for the
object of providing monetary relief to the victims or
their families. Therefore, the MV Act calls for a
liberal and wider interpretation to serve the real
purpose underlying the enactment and fulfil its
legislative intent. We are also of the view that in
order to maintain a claim petition, it is sufficient
for the claimant to establish his loss of dependency.
Section 166 of the MV Act makes it clear that every
legal representative who suffers on account of the
death of a person in a motor vehicle accident
should have a remedy for realisation of
compensation.”
15. In view of the above legal position, major son and daughter are
also held entitled to compensation as they also remain dependant upon the
salary of the deceased. Consequently, the compensation is reworked as
under:-
MOHD AYUB
2026.04.27 18:00
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this order/judgment.
FAO-1325-2018 (O&M)
FAO-1326-2018 (O&M)
-18-
Sr. No. Heads Compensation Awarded
1 Monthly Income Rs.46,100/-
2 Future prospects @ 15% Rs.6,915/- (15% of 46,100)
3 Deduction towards personal Rs.10,603/- (53,015 X 1/5)
expenditure 1/5
4 Total Income Rs.42,412/- (53,015-10,603)
5 Multiplier 9
6 Annual Dependency Rs.45,80,496/- (42,412 X 12 X 9)
7 Loss of Estate Rs.15,000/-
8 Funeral Expenses Rs.15,000 /-
9 Loss of Consortium Rs.2,00,000/-
Spousal : Rs.40,000 x 2
Filial : Rs.40,000 x 3
10 Total Compensation Rs.48,10,496/-
11 Deduction Rs.9,22,200/-
on account of compassionate
assistance to dependants
12 Amount to be granted Rs.38,88,496/- (48,10,496-9,22,200)
16. So far as the interest part is concerned, as held by Hon’ble
Supreme Court in Dara Singh @ Dhara Banjara Vs. Shyam Singh Varma
2019 ACJ 3176 and R.Valli and Others VS. Tamil Nadu State Transport
Corporation (2022) 5 Supreme Court Cases 107, the respondents-claimants
are granted the interest @ 9% per annum on the amount of total
compensation from the date of filing of claim petition till the date of its
realization.
17. Vide order dated 09.03.2018, Coordinate Bench of this Court
had stayed the recovery of amount beyond Rs.17,00,000. Consequently, the
appellant-Insurance Company is directed to deposit the remaining amount
along with interest @9% per annum with the Tribunal within a period of two
months from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment. The Tribunal is
MOHD AYUB
2026.04.27 18:00
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this order/judgment.
FAO-1325-2018 (O&M)
FAO-1326-2018 (O&M)
-19-
directed to disburse the same to the respondents-claimants in their bank
accounts. The respondents-claimants are directed to furnish their bank
account details to the Tribunal.
18. In view of the above, the present appeals are allowed to the
above extent.
19. The statutory amount of Rs.25,000/- deposited by the appellant-
insurance company at the time of admission of the appeal, is ordered to be
refunded to it.
20. Pending application (s), if any, also stand disposed of.
24.04.2026 (SUDEEPTI SHARMA)
Ayub/Sahil JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes
Whether reportable : Yes
MOHD AYUB
2026.04.27 18:00
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this order/judgment.
