United India Insurance Company Ltd vs Sandeep & Others on 30 July, 2026

    0
    7
    ADVERTISEMENT

    Himachal Pradesh High Court

    United India Insurance Company Ltd vs Sandeep & Others on 30 July, 2026

    Author: Virender Singh

    Bench: Virender Singh

                                 1                         2026:HHC:31618
    
    
    IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
    
    
    
    
                                                               .
    
                              FAO (MV) No. 136 of 2020 a/w
                              FAO (MV) Nos.118, 119, 121 &
                              235 of 2020, 215, 216, 217 & 218
    
    
    
    
    
                              of 2023, 141, 170, 239 & 240 of
                              2024, 127 and 136 of 2025
                                     Reserved on       :    06.07.2026
    
    
    
    
                                       of
                                     Decided on        :    30.07.2026
                                     Uploaded on       :    30.07.2026
    
    
    
                  1.
                         rt
                       FAO (MV) No. 136 of 2020
    
        United India Insurance Company Ltd.                ...Appellant
    
                              Versus
    
    
    
        Sandeep & Others                            ...Respondents
    
    
    
    
                  2.   FAO (MV) No. 118 of 2020
    
    
    
    
    
        United India Insurance Company Ltd.                ...Appellant
    
    
    
    
    
                              Versus
    
        Tara Devi & Others                          ...Respondents
    
                  3.   FAO (MV) No. 119 of 2020
    
        United India Insurance Company Ltd.                ...Appellant
    
                              Versus
    
        Tulsa Devi & Others                         ...Respondents
    
    
    
    
                                              ::: Downloaded on - 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS
                                   2                        2026:HHC:31618
    
    
                  4.    FAO (MV) No. 121 of 2020
    
    
    
    
                                                               .
        United India Insurance Company Ltd.               ...Appellant
    
    
    
    
    
                               Versus
    
    
    
    
    
        Bhag Singh & Others                         ...Respondents
    
                  5.    FAO (MV) No. 135 of 2020
    
    
    
    
                                        of
        United India Insurance Company Ltd.               ...Appellant
    
                         rt    Versus
    
        Sangeeta & Others                           ...Respondents
    
                  6.    FAO (MV) No. 215 of 2023
    
        United India Insurance Company Ltd.               ...Appellant
    
    
    
                               Versus
    
        Subi Devi & Others                          ...Respondents
    
    
    
    
                  7.    FAO (MV) No. 216 of 2023
    
    
    
    
    
        United India Insurance Company Ltd.               ...Appellant
    
    
    
    
    
                               Versus
    
        Subi Devi & Others                          ...Respondents
    
                  8.    FAO (MV) No. 217 of 2023
    
        United India Insurance Company Ltd.               ...Appellant
    
                               Versus
    
        Sarita Devi & Others                        ...Respondents
    
    
    
    
                                              ::: Downloaded on - 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS
                                   3                        2026:HHC:31618
    
    
                  9.     FAO (MV) No.218 of 2023
    
    
    
    
                                                               .
        United India Insurance Company Ltd.               ...Appellant
    
    
    
    
    
                               Versus
    
    
    
    
    
        Rohit Kumar & Others                        ...Respondents
    
                  10.    FAO (MV) No. 141 of 2024
    
    
    
    
                                        of
        United India Insurance Company Ltd.               ...Appellant
    
                               Versus
    
        Santo Devi & Others
                           rt                       ...Respondents
    
                  11.    FAO (MV) No. 170 of 2024
    
        United India Insurance Company Ltd.               ...Appellant
    
    
                               Versus
    
        Pinki & Others                              ...Respondents
    
    
    
    
                  12.    FAO (MV) No. 239 of 2024
    
    
    
    
    
        United India Insurance Company Ltd.               ...Appellant
    
                               Versus
    
    
    
    
    
        Anita & Others                              ...Respondents
    
                  13.    FAO (MV) No. 240 of 2024
    
        United India Insurance Company Ltd.               ...Appellant
    
                               Versus
    
        Kamla & Others                              ...Respondents
    
    
    
    
                                              ::: Downloaded on - 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS
                                    4                         2026:HHC:31618
    
    
                  14.     FAO (MV) No. 127 of 2025
    
    
    
    
                                                                 .
        Brij Mohan Jain                                     ...Appellant
    
    
    
    
    
                                Versus
    
    
    
    
    
        Akshay Kumar & Others                         ...Respondents
    
                  15.     FAO (MV) No. 136 of 2025
    
    
    
    
                                          of
        Brij Mohan Jain                                     ...Appellant
    
                                Versus
                          rt
        Akshay Kumar & Others                         ...Respondents
    
        Coram
        The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh, Judge.
    
    
    
        Whether approved for reporting?
    
                  1.      FAO No. 118 of 2020
    
    
    
    
    
    
        For the appellant:          Ms.     Rajvinder              Sandhu,
                                    Advocate.
    
    
    
    
    
        For the respondents:        Mr. Shyam Singh Chauhan,
                                    Advocate, for respondents No. 1
                                    to 7.
    
                                    Mr. Hemant Kumar Thakur,
                                    Advocate, vice Mr. Ravinder
                                    Thakur,      Advocate,  for
                                    respondent No.8.
    
    
    
    
                                                ::: Downloaded on - 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS
                                    5                        2026:HHC:31618
    
    
                        2.     FAO No. 119 of 2020
    
    
    
    
                                                                .
        For the appellant:          Ms.     Rajvinder             Sandhu,
    
    
    
    
    
                                    Advocate.
    
        For the respondents:        Mr. Shyam Singh Chauhan,
    
    
    
    
    
                                    Advocate, for respondents No.1 to
                                    6.
    
    
    
    
                                         of
                                    Mr. Hemant Kumar Thakur,
                                    Advocate, vice Mr. Ravinder
                                    Thakur, Advocate, for respondent
                         rt         No.7.
    
                        3.     FAO No. 121 of 2020
    
        For the appellant:          Ms.     Rajvinder             Sandhu,
                                    Advocate.
    
        For the respondents:        Mr. Shyam Singh Chauhan,
    
    
    
                                    Advocate, for respondents No.1 &
                                    2.
    
    
    
    
                                    Mr. Hemant Kumar Thakur,
                                    Advocate, vice Mr. Ravinder
    
    
    
    
    
                                    Thakur, Advocate, for respondent
                                    No.3.
    
    
    
    
    
                  4.    FAO No. 135 of 2020
    
        For the appellant:          Ms.     Rajvinder             Sandhu,
                                    Advocate.
    
        For the respondents:        Mr. Sanjay Ranta, Advocate, for
                                    respondents No. 1 and 2.
    
                                    Mr. Hemant Kumar Thakur,
                                    Advocate, vice Mr. Ravinder
    
    
    
    
                                               ::: Downloaded on - 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS
                                    6                        2026:HHC:31618
    
    
                                    Thakur, Advocate, for respondent
                                    No.3.
    
    
    
    
                                                                .
    
                        5.     FAO No. 136 of 2020
    
        For the appellant:          Ms. Rajvinder Sandhu, Advocate.
    
    
    
    
    
        For the respondents:        Mr. Sanjay Ranta, Advocate, for
                                    respondents No. 1 and 2.
    
    
    
    
                                         of
                                    Mr. Hemant Kumar Thakur,
                                    Advocate vice Mr. Ravinder
                        rt          Thakur, Advocate, for respondent
                                    No.3.
    
                                    Mr. Mohinder Zharaick, Mr. H.S.
    
                                    Rawat, Additional A.Gs., for
                                    respondents No. 4, 6 & 7.
    
                                    None for respondent No. 5.
    
    
    
                        6.     FAO No. 215 of 2023
    
        For the appellant:
    
    
    
    
                                    Ms.     Rajvinder             Sandhu,
                                    Advocate.
    
    
    
    
    
        For the respondents:        Mr. Sanjay Ranta, Advocate, for
                                    respondents No. 1 to 3.
    
    
    
    
    
                                    Mr. Hemant Kumar Thakur,
                                    Advocate, vice Mr. Ravinder
                                    Thakur, Advocate, for respondent
                                    No.4.
    
                                    Mr. Mohinder Zharaick, Mr. H.S.
                                    Rawat, Additional A.Gs., for
                                    respondents No. 5 and 7.
    
    
    
    
                                               ::: Downloaded on - 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS
                                    7                        2026:HHC:31618
    
    
                                    Mr. B.N. Sharma, Advocate, for
                                    respondent No. 6.
    
    
    
    
                                                                .
    
                        7.     FAO No. 216 of 2023
    
        For the appellant:          Ms.     Rajvinder             Sandhu,
    
    
    
    
    
                                    Advocate.
    
        For the respondents:        Mr. Sanjay Ranta, Advocate, for
    
    
    
    
                                         of
                                    respondents No. 1 to 3.
    
                                    Mr. Hemant Kumar Thakur,
                        rt          Advocate, vice Mr. Ravinder
                                    Thakur, Advocate, for respondent
                                    No.4.
    
                                    Mr. Mohinder Zharaick, Mr. H.S.
                                    Rawat, Additional A.Gs., for
                                    respondents No. 5 and 7.
                                    Mr. B.N. Sharma, Advocate, for
    
    
                                    respondent No.6.
    
                        8.     FAO No. 217 of 2023
    
    
    
    
        For the appellant :         Ms.     Rajvinder             Sandhu,
    
    
    
    
    
                                    Advocate.
    
        For the respondents:        Mr. Ajay Kumar, Advocate, for
    
    
    
    
    
                                    respondents No. 1 to 3.
    
                                    Mr. Hemant Kumar Thakur,
                                    Advocate, vice Mr. Ravinder
                                    Thakur, Advocate, for respondent
                                    No.4.
    
                        9.     FAO No. 218 of 2023
    
        For the appellant:          Ms.     Rajvinder             Sandhu,
                                    Advocate.
    
    
    
    
                                               ::: Downloaded on - 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS
                                    8                        2026:HHC:31618
    
    
        For the respondents:        Mr. Sanjay Ranta, Advocate, for
                                    respondents No. 1 to 4.
    
    
    
    
                                                                .
    
                                    Mr. Hemant Kumar Thakur,
                                    Advocate, vice Mr. Ravinder
                                    Thakur, Advocate, for respondent
    
    
    
    
    
                                    No.5.
    
                                    Mr. Mohinder Zharaick, Mr. H.S.
    
    
    
    
                                         of
                                    Rawat, Additional A.Gs., for
                                    respondents No. 6 and 8.
    
                        rt          Mr. B.N. Sharma, Advocate, for
                                    respondent No.7.
    
                        10.    FAO No. 141 of 2024
    
        For the appellant:          Ms.     Rajvinder             Sandhu,
                                    Advocate.
    
    
    
        For the respondents:        Mr. Shyam Singh Chauhan,
                                    Advocate, for respondents No.1
                                    to 7.
    
    
    
    
                                    Mr. Hemant Kumar Thakur,
    
    
    
    
    
                                    Advocate, vice Mr. Ravinder
                                    Thakur, Advocate, for respondent
                                    No.8.
    
    
    
    
    
                        11.    FAO No. 170 of 2024
    
        For the appellant:          Ms.     Rajvinder             Sandhu,
                                    Advocate.
    
        For the respondents:        Mr. Sanjay Ranta, Advocate, for
                                    respondent No. 1.
    
                                    Mr. Hemant Kumar Thakur,
                                    Advocate, vice Mr. Ravinder
    
    
    
    
                                               ::: Downloaded on - 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS
                                    9                        2026:HHC:31618
    
    
                                    Thakur, Advocate, for respondent
                                    No.2.
    
    
    
    
                                                                .
    
                        12.    FAO No. 239 of 2024
    
        For the appellant:          Ms.     Rajvinder             Sandhu,
    
    
    
    
    
                                    Advocate.
    
        For the respondents:        Mr. Sanjay Ranta, Advocate, for
    
    
    
    
                                         of
                                    respondents No. 1 to 3.
    
                                    Mr. Hemant Kumar Thakur,
                        rt          Advocate, vice Mr. Ravinder
                                    Thakur, Advocate, for respondent
                                    No. 4.
    
                                    Mr. Mohinder Zharaick, Mr. H.S.
                                    Rawat, Additional A.Gs., for
                                    respondent No. 5.
    
    
                                    Respondent No. 6 exparte.
    
                        13.    FAO No. 240 of 2024
    
    
    
    
        For the appellant:          Ms.     Rajvinder             Sandhu,
    
    
    
    
    
                                    Advocate.
    
        For the respondents:        Mr. Sanjay Ranta, Advocate, for
    
    
    
    
    
                                    respondents No. 1 to 4.
                                    Mr. Hemant Kumar Thakur,
                                    Advocate, vice Mr. Ravinder
                                    Thakur, Advocate, for respondent
                                    No. 5.
    
                                    None for respondent No. 7.
    
                                    Mr. Tejasvi Sharma, Mr. H.S.
                                    Rawat, Additional A.Gs., for
                                    respondents No. 6 and 8.
    
    
    
    
                                               ::: Downloaded on - 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS
                                   10                        2026:HHC:31618
    
    
    
    
                                   Mr. B.N. Sharma, Advocate, for
    
    
    
    
                                                                .
                                   respondent No.9.
    
    
    
    
    
                        14.    FAO No. 127 of 2025
    
    
    
    
    
        For the appellant:         Mr. Hemant Kumar Thakur,
                                   Advocate, for the appellant.
    
    
    
    
                                         of
        For the respondents:       Mr. Sunny Rawat, Advocate, for
                                   respondents No. 1 to 6.
    
                        rt         Ms. Rajvinder Sandhu, Advocate,
                                   for respondent No. 7.
    
                        15.    FAO No. 136 of 2025
    
        For the appellant:         Mr. Hemant Kumar Thakur,
                                   Advocate, for the appellant.
    
    
    
        For the respondents:       Mr. Sunny Rawat, Advocate, for
                                   respondents No. 1 to 6.
    
    
    
    
                                   Ms. Rajvinder Sandhu, Advocate,
                                   for respondent No. 7.
    
    
    
    
    
        Virender Singh, Judge
    

    The above titled appeals are being decided by a

    common judgment, as the appellant­United India Insurance

    SPONSORED

    Company Ltd., and the owner of the offending vehicle, have

    filed these appeals, under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles

    Act (hereinafter referred to as ‘the M.V. Act‘), against the

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS
    11 2026:HHC:31618

    awards, which have been passed by the learned Motor

    .

    Accident Claims Tribunal (III), Shimla, Camp at Rohru,

    District Shimla, H.P., learned Motor Accident Claims

    Tribunal­I, Sirmaur District at Nahan, H.P., learned

    Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (II), Shimla, learned

    of
    Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Paonta Sahib, District
    rt
    Sirmaur, learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (III),

    Shimla, and learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,

    Rohru, District Shimla, respectively, (hereinafter referred to

    as ‘the MACT’), in the claim petitions, which have arisen out

    of the same accident, which had taken place on 19.04.2017,

    at place Antroli (Gumma), involving bus No.UK16­PA­0045

    (hereinafter referred to as ‘the offending vehicle’).

    2. The offending vehicle was owned by Brij Mohan

    Jain; was driven by its driver, in a rash and negligent

    manner (who unfortunately expired in the said accident) and

    insured with the United India Insurance Company.

    3. FAO (MV) No. 136 of 2020 has been preferred

    by the Insurance Company against the award dated

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS
    12 2026:HHC:31618

    18.01.2020, passed by the learned MACT, in MAC RBT Case

    .

    No.14­S/2 of 2018/2017, titled as ‘Sandeep & Another

    Versus Brij Mohan Jain & Another’, wherein a sum of Rs.

    29,10,224/­, along with interest, at the rate of 9% per

    annum, from the date of filing of the petition, till the

    of
    realization of the whole awarded amount, with costs of

    Rs.5,000/­, has been awarded by fastening the ultimate
    rt
    liability upon the owner, however, the insurance company

    has been directed to pay, at the first instance, and recover

    the same from respondent No.1 (owner).

    4. FAO (MV) No. 118 of 2020, has been preferred

    by the Insurance Company against the award dated

    06.12.2019, passed by the learned MACT, in MAC Petition

    No.170­MAC/2 of 2017, titled as ‘Tara Devi & Others Versus

    Brij Mohan Jain & Another’, wherein a sum of Rs.

    11,72,400/­, along with interest, at the rate of 7% per

    annum, from the date of filing of the petition, till the

    realization of the whole awarded amount, has been awarded

    by fastening the ultimate liability upon the Insurance

    Company.

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS

    13 2026:HHC:31618

    5. FAO (MV) No. 119 of 2020, has been preferred

    .

    by the Insurance Company against the award dated

    05.12.2019, passed by the learned MACT, in MAC Petition

    No.165­MAC/2 of 2017, titled as ‘Tulsa Devi & Others

    Versus Brij Mohan Jain & Another’, wherein a sum of Rs.

    of
    9,47,500/­, along with interest, at the rate of 7% per annum,

    from the date of filing of the petition, till the realization of the
    rt
    whole awarded amount, has been awarded by fastening the

    ultimate liability upon the Insurance Company.

    6. FAO (MV) No. 121 of 2020, has been preferred

    by the Insurance Company against the award dated

    21.08.2019, passed by the learned MACT, in MAC Petition

    No.163­MAC/2 of 2017, titled as ‘Bhag Singh & Another

    Versus Brij Mohan Jain & Another’, wherein a sum of Rs.

    9,37,200/­, along with interest, at the rate of 7% per annum,

    from the date of filing of the petition, till the realization of the

    whole awarded amount, has been awarded by fastening the

    ultimate liability upon the Insurance Company.

    7. FAO (MV) No. 135 of 2020, has been preferred

    by the Insurance Company against the award dated

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS
    14 2026:HHC:31618

    18.01.2020, passed by the learned MACT, in MAC RBT Case

    .

    No.15­S/2 of 2018/2017, titled as ‘Sangeeta & Another

    Versus Brij Mohan Jain & Another’, wherein a sum of Rs.

    17,90,120/­, along with interest, at the rate of 9% per

    annum, from the date of filing of the petition, till the

    of
    realization of the whole awarded amount, with costs of

    Rs.5,000/­, has been awarded by fastening the ultimate
    rt
    liability upon the owner, however, it is also ordered that the

    Insurance Company shall pay, at the first instance and

    recover the same from respondent No.1.

    8. FAO (MV) No. 215 of 2023, has been preferred

    by the Insurance Company against the award dated

    24.12.2022, passed by the learned MACT, in MAC Petition

    No.5­S/2 of 2018, titled as ‘Subi Devi & Others Versus Brij

    Mohan Jain & Others’, wherein a sum of Rs. 8,00,000/­,

    along with interest, at the rate of 7.5% per annum, from the

    date of filing of the petition, till the realization of the whole

    awarded amount, has been awarded by fastening the

    ultimate liability upon the owner and Insurance Company.

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS

    15 2026:HHC:31618

    9. FAO (MV) No. 216 of 2023, has been preferred

    .

    by the Insurance Company against the award dated

    24.12.2022, passed by the learned MACT, in MAC Petition

    No.6­S/2 of 2018, titled as ‘Subi Devi & Others Versus Brij

    Mohan Jain & Others’, wherein a sum of Rs.8,90,000/­,

    of
    along with interest, at the rate of 7.5% per annum, from the

    date of filing of the petition, till the realization of the whole
    rt
    awarded amount, has been awarded by fastening the

    ultimate liability upon the owner and insurance­company.

    10. FAO (MV) No. 217 of 2023, has been preferred

    by the Insurance Company against the award dated

    29.12.2022, passed by the learned MACT, in MAC Petition

    No.38­S/2 of 2017, titled as ‘Sarita Devi & Others Versus

    Brij Mohan Jain & Another’, wherein a sum of Rs.

    14,66,172/­, along with interest, at the rate of 7.5% per

    annum, from the date of filing of the petition, till the

    realization of the whole awarded amount, has been awarded

    by fastening the ultimate liability upon the owner and

    Insurance Company.

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS

    16 2026:HHC:31618

    11. FAO (MV) No. 218 of 2023, has been preferred

    .

    by the Insurance Company against the award dated

    30.11.2022, passed by the learned MACT, in MAC Petition

    No.7­S/2 of 2018, titled as ‘Rohit Kumar & Others Versus

    Brij Mohan Jain & Others’, wherein a sum of Rs.

    of
    14,30,800/­, along with interest, at the rate of 7.5% per

    annum, from the date of filing of the petition, till the
    rt
    realization of the whole awarded amount, has been awarded

    by fastening the ultimate liability upon the owner and

    Insurance Company.

    12. FAO (MV) No. 141 of 2024, has been preferred

    by the Insurance Company against the award dated

    24.08.2023, passed by the learned MACT, in MAC Petition

    No.209­N/2 of 2017, titled as ‘Santo Devi & Others Versus

    Brij Mohan Jain & Another’, wherein a sum of Rs.

    12,25,500/­, along with interest, at the rate of 6% per

    annum, from the date of filing of the petition, till the

    realization of the whole awarded amount, has been awarded

    by fastening the ultimate liability upon the insurance­

    company.

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS

    17 2026:HHC:31618

    13. FAO (MV) No. 170 of 2024, has been preferred

    .

    by the Insurance Company against the award dated

    23.05.2023, passed by the learned MACT, in MACC No.33­

    S/2 of 2022/19, titled as ‘Pinki Versus Brij Mohan Jain &

    Another’, wherein a sum of Rs. 13,69,948/­, along with

    of
    interest, at the rate of 9% per annum, from the date of filing

    of the petition, till the realization of the whole awarded
    rt
    amount, has been awarded by fastening the ultimate liability

    upon the owner, however, it has been ordered that the

    Insurance Company shall pay, at the first instance and

    recover the same from respondent No.1.

    14. FAO (MV) No. 239 of 2024, has been preferred

    by the Insurance Company against the award dated

    26.02.2024, passed by the learned MACT, in MAC Petition

    No.55­S/2 of 2019, titled as ‘Anita & Others Versus Brij

    Mohan Jain & Others’, wherein a sum of Rs.13,40,080/­

    along with interest, at the rate of 9% per annum, from the

    date of filing of the petition, till the realization of the whole

    awarded amount, has been awarded by fastening the

    ultimate liability upon the Insurance Company.

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS

    18 2026:HHC:31618

    15. FAO (MV) No. 240 of 2024, has been preferred

    .

    by the Insurance Company against the award dated

    26.02.2024, passed by the learned MACT, in MAC Petition

    No.41­S/2 of 2019, titled as ‘Kamla & Others Versus Brij

    Mohan Jain & Others’, wherein a sum of Rs.12,60,700/­,

    of
    along with interest, at the rate of 9% per annum, from the

    date of filing of the petition, till the realization of the whole
    rt
    awarded amount, has been awarded by fastening the

    ultimate liability upon the insurance­company.

    16. FAO (MV) No. 127 of 2025, has been preferred

    by the owner of the offending vehicle against the award

    dated 09.08.2024, passed by the learned MACT, in MACT

    Case RBT No.46­R/2 of 2023/17, titled as ‘Akshay Kumar &

    Others Versus Brij Mohan Jain & Another’, wherein a sum of

    Rs. 19,01,700/­, along with interest, at the rate of 6% per

    annum, from the date of filing of the petition, till the

    realization of the whole awarded amount, has been awarded

    by fastening the ultimate liability upon the owner of the

    offending vehicle (respondent No.1).

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS

    19 2026:HHC:31618

    17. FAO (MV) No. 136 of 2025, has been preferred

    .

    by the owner of the offending vehicle against the award

    dated 09.08.2024, passed by the learned MACT, in MACT

    Case RBT No.49­R/2 of 2023/17, titled as ‘Akshay Kumar &

    Others Versus Brij Mohan Jain & Another’, wherein a sum of

    of
    Rs.17,89,200/­, along with interest, at the rate of 6% per

    annum, from the date of filing of the petition, till the
    rt
    realization of the whole awarded amount, has been awarded

    by fastening the ultimate liability upon the owner of the

    offending vehicle (respondent No.1).

    18. Learned MACT, while deciding the above titled

    claim petitions, have fastened the liability to pay the

    compensation upon the Insurance Company and the owner,

    and in some of the cases, liberty has been given to Insurance

    Company to pay the amount of compensation to the

    claimants, at the first instance, and recover the same from

    respondent No.1 Brij Mohan.

    19. All the appeals have been preferred by the

    Insurance Company and owner of the offending vehicle,

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS
    20 2026:HHC:31618

    against the awards passed by the learned MACT, as referred

    .

    to above.

    20. FAO No.136 of 2020, arising out of a case RBT

    No.14­S/2 of 2018/2017, titled as Sandeep & Another

    versus Brij Mohan & Others, is being taken as lead case to

    of
    decide the controversy, involved in the above titled appeals.

    21. For the sake of convenience, the parties to the
    rt
    present lis, are, hereinafter referred to, in the same manner,

    as were, referred to, by the learned MACT.

    STAND OF THE PETITIONERS BEFORE LEARNED MACT:

    22. Brief facts, leading to the filing of RBT No.14­S/2

    of 2018/2017, titled as Sandeep & Another versus Brij

    Mohan & Others, as borne out from the records, may be

    summed up as under:­

    23. The petitioners have filed the claim petition,

    under Section 166 of the M.V. Act, seeking compensation, on

    account of death of their father Maan Singh, in a road side

    accident, involving the offending vehicle. As per their stand,

    age of their father Shri Maan Singh, at the time of accident,

    was 47 years. He was fruit merchant/contractor and used

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS
    21 2026:HHC:31618

    to take apple orchard on lease and on contract basis, for the

    .

    last 15 years. He used to grow vegetables on the land of the

    local villagers and earning Rs.20,000/­ per month and

    Rs.20,000/­ per month from apple orchard.

    24. It is the further case of the petitioners that on

    of
    19.04.2017, their father was traveling in the offending

    vehicle from Vikasnagar to Tiuni and then to Rohru. When
    rt
    the offending vehicle reached near Antroli (Gumma), at

    about 10.30 a.m., the driver could not control the offending

    vehicle, as, he was driving the vehicle in a very high speed.

    Consequently, the offending vehicle rolled down from the

    road and plunged into the Tons River. In the said accident,

    Shri Maan Singh sustained fatal injuries and expired.

    25. Information regarding the accident was given to

    Police Station, Nerwa, where, FIR No.20/2017 dated

    19.04.2017, under Sections 279, 337, 304­A of IPC was

    registered.

    26. The petitioners have also pleaded their bright

    past and bleak future. Since, the accident, in question, has

    solely been attributed to the rash and negligent driving, of

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS
    22 2026:HHC:31618

    the offending vehicle, by the driver. As such, the claimants

    .

    have sought the compensation, along with interest, from the

    respondents.

    STAND OF THE RESPONDENTS BEFORE LEARNED
    MACT:

    of

    27. When put to notice, respondent No.1­owner has

    contested the claim petition, by filing his reply, in which, he
    rt
    has taken the preliminary objections, that the claim petition

    is not maintainable.

    28. On merits, the contents of the claim petition have

    been contested, however, the factum of accident has not

    been disputed. He has also admitted that the offending

    vehicle was insured with United India Insurance Company.

    He has also annexed the copy of Insurance Policy, copy of

    registration certificate and copy of route permit, along with

    the reply. Other contents of the claim petition have been

    denied including the allegations of driving the offending

    vehicle in a rash and negligent manner. Other contents

    have been denied for want of knowledge.

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS

    23 2026:HHC:31618

    29. United India Insurance Company has filed its

    .

    separate reply, by taking the preliminary objections, that the

    petition is not maintainable, as the accident, in question,

    had taken place due to the rash and negligent driving of the

    offending vehicle; the claim petition is vague, misconceived

    of
    and does not disclose any cause of action; the driver of the

    offending vehicle was not having a valid and effective driving
    rt
    licence to drive the same, at the time of accident and the

    owner of the offending vehicle has not taken any steps to

    check the validity of the license; the vehicle was being plied

    in contravention of the terms and conditions of the

    insurance policy, as, the vehicle was overloaded and 47

    passengers were travelling against the seating capacity of 37;

    the offending vehicle was being plied in the area of Himachal

    Pradesh, without a valid and effective permit, valid

    registration and fitness certificate, as such, the insurance

    company has sought exoneration of its liability to indemnify

    the owner, on account of breach of standard policy

    conditions; and the claim petition has been filed by the

    claimants in collusion with respondent No.1.

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS

    24 2026:HHC:31618

    30. On merits, the contents of the claim petition have

    .

    mainly been denied for want of knowledge.

    31. Respondent No.3­RTO Shimla has filed separate

    reply, by denying the factual position, as mentioned, in the

    petition. It has also been pleaded that respondent No.3

    of
    carried out mechanical inspection on the spot and forwarded

    its report to the Director Transport.

    32.
    rt
    Respondent No.4­RTO Dehradoon (Uttrakhand),

    has filed reply, by pleading that the route permit of the

    offending vehicle was issued for Vikasnagar­Tiuni­Atal vide

    route permit No.PATP4729 in favour of Brij Mohan. The

    condition of the permit of the route is Vikas Nagar Centre­II

    to Set No.5 only and the accident has taken place at Gumma

    Himachal Pradesh, which is beyond the route issued by

    respondent No.4.

    33. It is the further case of respondent No.4 that

    there is no agreement between the Government of

    Uttrakhand and Government of Himachal Pradesh,

    according to which, the route permit is valid in other State.

    Other contents of the claim petition have been contested.

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS

    25 2026:HHC:31618

    34. Respondent No.5 has filed the reply denying the

    .

    averments, made in the claim petition. Hence, a prayer has

    been made by the respondents to dismiss the claim petition.

    PROCEEDINGS BEFORE LEARNED MACT:

    35. From the pleadings of the parties, the following

    of
    issues were framed, by learned MACT vide order dated

    30.10.2018 :­ rt

    1. Whether the death of Shri Maan Singh took place in a
    motor accident because of rash and negligent driving

    of the driver of vehicle No.UK­16PA­0045, as alleged?

    OPP

    2. If issue No. 1 is proved in affirmative, whether the
    petitioners are entitled for compensation, if so, to what

    extent and from whom? OPP

    3. Whether the respondents No. 3 to 6 wrongly permitted
    the owner of he vehicle to ply the vehicle on the said

    route, as alleged, if so to what effect? OPP

    4. Whether the petitioner of the petitioners is not
    maintainable, as alleged? OPR

    5. Whether the offending vehicle UK­16PA­0045 was not
    insured with respondent No.2, as alleged? OPR­2

    6. whether the driver of the offending vehicle was not
    holding a valid and effective driving licence to ply it, as
    alleged? OPR­2

    7. Whether the offending vehicle was being driven in
    breach of the terms of Insurance Policy, as alleged?

    OPR­2

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS
    26 2026:HHC:31618

    8. Whether the offending vehicle was over loaded, as
    alleged, if so to what effect? OPR­2

    .

    9. Whether the offending vehicle was being plied within
    the territory of Himachal Pradesh without route permit,
    as alleged if so to what effect? OPR­2

    10. Relief.

    36. Thereafter, the parties to the lis were directed to

    of
    adduce evidence.

    37. After closure of the evidence and after hearing
    rt
    the learned counsel appearing for the parties, the learned

    MACT has allowed the petition, as referred to above.

    STAND OF THE INSURANCE COMPANY BEFORE THIS

    COURT:

    38. Feeling aggrieved from the award, the Insurance

    Company of the offending vehicle has preferred FAO No. 136

    of 2020, along with 12 other appeals, as referred to above,

    before this Court, mainly on the ground that issue No.6 has

    not been properly decided by the learned MACT, as, at the

    time of accident, the offending vehicle was carrying 47

    persons against the seating capacity of 37.

    39. The owner has filed FAO (MV) Nos.127 and 136

    of 2025, with a prayer to set aside the award passed by the

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS
    27 2026:HHC:31618

    learned MACT, by virtue of which, the owner has been

    .

    directed to pay the amount of compensation, as well as, the

    awards, by virtue of which, the Insurance Company has

    been permitted to recover the amount of compensation from

    him, after paying the same to the petitioner.

    of

    40. According to the learned counsel for the

    appellant­Insurance Company, there is violation of the terms
    rt
    and conditions of the insurance policy, as the permit was

    issued to the offending vehicle for the route, falling within

    the State of Uttrakhand, whereas, the offending vehicle was

    being plied within the territory of Himachal Pradesh, without

    any route permit and this fact has clearly been admitted by

    respondent No.1, in his cross­examination. However, the

    learned MACT, relying upon Section 88 of the M.V. Act, has

    given the benefit of doubt to the insured and fastened the

    liability on the appellant.

    41. Highlighting the fact that the distance from

    Minas to Fediztul is 18 kilometers, as per the report of

    Regional Manager, HRTC and the said distance, according to

    the Executive Engineer, Chopal Division, is 16.64

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS
    28 2026:HHC:31618

    kilometers, it has been pleaded that there is clear­cut

    .

    violation of Section 88(1) of the M.V. Act.

    42. On the basis of the above facts, Ms. Rajvinder

    Sandhu, Advocate, appearing for the Insurance Company,

    has prayed that the appeals, preferred by the Insurance

    of
    Company, may kindly be allowed, by exonerating the

    Insurance Company from indemnifying the owner of the
    rt
    offending vehicle. In addition to this, she has also prayed

    that the compensation is on the higher side and the same

    may kindly be reduced.

    43. Per contra, Shri Shyam Singh Chauhan & Mr.

    Sanjay Ranta, learned counsel appearing for the claimants,

    have supported the award and prayed that the appeals san

    merit and the same may kindly be dismissed, by enhancing

    the award, so that the same could fall within the definition of

    ‘just compensation’.

    44. The owner of the offending vehicle, who has also

    filed FAO (MV) Nos.127 and 136 of 2025, has prayed that

    the Insurance Company has miserably failed to prove the

    violation of the terms and conditions of the Insurance Policy,

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS
    29 2026:HHC:31618

    especially the violation of route permit. As such, the learned

    .

    MACT has wrongly fastened the liability upon him to pay the

    compensation and also give right to recover the amount of

    compensation, after paying the same to the petitioners.

    45. In these appeals, the Insurance Company has

    of
    prayed that the company be exonerated from indemnifying

    the owner, as, the offending vehicle was being plied without
    rt
    route permit and as such, the said violation is stated to be

    fundamental breach of insurance policy.

    46. As per the stand taken by the claimants, the

    accident, in question, had taken place, near Antroli

    (Gumma) and FIR was registered with Police Station, Nerwa,

    District Shimla, under Sections 279, 337, 304­A of IPC. In

    this case, the place of accident is not in dispute, which,

    admittedly, falls within the territorial jurisdiction of

    Himachal Pradesh.

    47. As per the claimants, deceased was travelling in

    the offending vehicle from Vikas Nagar to Tiuni. The

    Insurance Company has taken the plea that the offending

    vehicle was overloaded and the same was being plied within

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS
    30 2026:HHC:31618

    the territory of Himachal Pradesh, without any valid and

    .

    effective permit. Respondent No.4, RTO Dehradoon, has

    mentioned, in the reply, that the route permit for offending

    vehicle was issued to ply the same from Vikas Nagar to

    Tiuni, vide permit No.PATP4729.

    of

    48. In order to decide the above stand of the

    appellant­Insurance Company, it would be necessary to
    rt
    discuss the evidence, so adduced, by the respondents, before

    the learned MACT.

    49. RW­1 is Devinder Kumar, Senior Assistant, RTO

    Shimla. He, when appeared in the witness­box, has feigned

    his ignorance, by stating that RTO Office Shimla was not

    aware that the offending vehicle was being plied in the State

    of Himachal Pradesh, during the year 2017. According to

    him, RTO and other authorized officers of the State, check

    the vehicles, off and on, and in case, any vehicle is found,

    being plied without valid documents/authorization, the

    same are being dealt with, in accordance with law. In this

    regard, he has submitted the report of the committee as Ex.

    RW­1/A.

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS
    31 2026:HHC:31618

    50. In the cross­examination, by the respondent­

    .

    claimants, this witness has admitted that the accident had

    taken place within the territorial jurisdiction of RTO Shimla.

    51. In the cross­examination by learned counsel

    appearing for respondent No.1, this witness has again

    of
    feigned his ignorance about the distance of the spot, where,

    the accident had taken place from Uttrakhand border.

    52.
    rt
    RW­3 Brij Mohan Jain, owner of the offending

    vehicle, has tendered in evidence his affidavit Ex.RW­3/A,

    copy of award dated 19.11.2018 Ex.RW­3/B, copy of RC

    Mark RA, copy of permit mark RB, copy of insurance mark

    RC, copy of vehicle particular mark RD, copy of extract of

    driving licence of Kamal Singh mark­RE and copy of list of

    routes mark RF.

    53. In the affidavit, this witness has deposed that the

    offending vehicle was enroute Vikas Nagar to Tiuni and the

    vehicle, at the time of accident, was being plied, in

    accordance with all legal documents, license, registration

    certificate, route permit and fitness certificate. The vehicle

    was being plied, as per the terms and conditions of the

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS
    32 2026:HHC:31618

    insurance policy and as per the policy, the Insurance

    .

    Company is liable to indemnify, for any loss, caused on

    account of plying the vehicle. The vehicle met with an

    accident in the State of Himachal Pradesh, as, the route

    from Vikas Nagar to Tiuni passes through a small portion of

    of
    Himachal Pradesh and vehicles are allowed to run on above

    road from the last few years, without any interruption and
    rt
    as per the M.V. Act, there is no requirement to take separate

    permit for the area, which falls in the State of Himachal

    Pradesh. Lastly, he has categorically stated that at the time

    of accident, there were only 37 passengers in the bus, and

    other than 37 people, who have sustained injuries and

    succumbed to death, were pedestrians.

    54. In the cross­examination by the learned counsel

    appearing for the Insurance Company, this witness has

    admitted that he never travelled in his bus from Vikas Nagar

    to Tiuni. However, he has admitted that the offending

    vehicle crosses from Himachal and the distance covered in

    Himachal is about 7­8 kilometers. He has admitted that no

    permit was issued to ply the bus in Himachal over the above

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS
    33 2026:HHC:31618

    distance. There was no endorsement on the permit by

    .

    Himachal authorities. He has denied that at the time of

    accident,47 persons were travelling in the offending vehicle,

    out of which, 45 have died.

    55. In the cross­examination by the learned counsel

    of
    for the petitioners, he has denied that the driver of the

    offending vehicle requested that the offending vehicle
    rt
    requires some repair. He has also denied that the vehicle

    met with an accident on account of the mechanical defect.

    He has feigned his ignorance that the accident in question,

    had taken place due to non­maintenance of the road,

    however, admitted that the road was in bad shape. He has

    further admitted that the accident in question had taken

    place in Himachal area, which is at a distance of 3

    kilometers from the Uttrakhand border.

    56. In the cross­examination by respondent No.1, he

    has admitted that the RTO Dehradoon, has issued permit for

    the route Vikasnagar Centre to Set No.5, within his

    jurisdiction.

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS

    34 2026:HHC:31618

    57. Respondent No.4 Rajinder Mohan Sharma,

    .

    Administrative Officer, United India Insurance Company,

    has tendered his affidavit in evidence, Ex.RW­4/A and copy

    of insurance policy Ex.RX.

    58. In the examination­in­chief, RW­4, has deposed

    of
    that as per the terms and conditions of the insurance policy,

    issued to the insured, the permit was not valid for being
    rt
    plied, outside the jurisdiction of the said permit, without any

    endorsement. He has also deposed that the place, where,

    the accident had taken place, is 18.5 kilometers, from the

    border and the bus was overloaded and carrying 47

    passengers, against the permitted capacity of 37, including

    driver and conductor. The vehicle was being plied outside

    the permit area and lastly, he has deposed, in his

    examination­in­chief, that there is violation of Section 88 of

    the M.V. Act.

    59. In the cross­examination, this witness has denied

    all the suggestions, which have been put to him by learned

    counsel for respondent No.1, but, admitted that the route­

    Vikas Nagar to Tiuni had starting and destination point in

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS
    35 2026:HHC:31618

    Uttrakhand. According to him, the accident took place at a

    .

    distance of about 18.5 k.m., inside Himachal from

    Uttrakhand border. Voluntarily stated that endorsement on

    the permit is essentially required from RTO of Himachal

    Pradesh. In the cross­examination, by learned counsel for

    of
    the petitioner, he has admitted that he has not visited the

    site of the accident.

    60.
    rt
    RW­5, Mehmood, Senior Assistant, office of

    Regional Transport Officer, Vikasnagar, has deposed on the

    basis of the record that route permit for the offending vehicle

    was valid from 17.06.2015 to 16.6.2020. As per their

    record, the route permit does not authorize respondent No.1

    to ply the offending vehicle in any part of Himachal Pradesh.

    61. In the cross­examination, by learned counsel for

    respondent No.1, he has admitted that as per the route

    permit, the starting point and terminal point, are in the

    State of Uttrakhand. He has admitted that route permit

    issued was valid. He has denied that the offending vehicle

    was being plied on the prescribed route permit. Voluntarily

    stated that the accident took place at a distance of 10

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS
    36 2026:HHC:31618

    kilometers from Minus in District Shimla. Firstly, he has

    .

    feigned his ignorance by deposing that in terms of Section 88

    of the M.V. Act, the vehicle could ply for short distance in

    another State, but, voluntarily stated that for plying vehicle

    beyond the prescribed route, permit from other transport

    of
    authority is required.

    62. RW­6 Narinder Singh, at the relevant time, was
    rt
    posted as SHO Police Station, Nerwa. He has deposed that

    he, initially investigated the case, arising out of FIR No.20 of

    2017. He has inspected the spot and during investigation,

    clicked the photographs of the spot and dead bodies. He has

    also deposed that as per the statement of witnesses

    recorded, the accident took place due to rash and negligent

    driving of the driver of the offending vehicle. He has also

    deposed that the place of occurrence was at a distance of 9½

    kilometers from Uttrakhand border via Minas and 7

    kilometers via Attal. He has also deposed that during

    investigation, he has not inquired about the route permit, as

    on his transfer, he has handed over the file to his successor.

    He has also tendered the copies of final report as Ex.RW­

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS
    37 2026:HHC:31618

    6/A, spot map Ex.RW­6/B, seizure memo Ex.RW­6/C and

    .

    statement of Tulsi Ram Ex.RW­6/D.

    63. In the cross­examination by respondent No.1,

    this witness has deposed that the RC and insurance were

    taken into possession and checked by him, however, he has

    of
    denied that only 37 passengers were travelling in the bus.

    64. In the cross­examination by the petitioners, this
    rt
    witness has feigned his ignorance about the exact distance

    between the place of occurrence in Himachal Pradesh from

    Uttrakhand border.

    65. RW­7 Prittam Singh Chandel, who has been

    appointed as investigator, in the present case, has filed his

    affidavit Ex.RW­7/A. In the examination­in­chief, this

    witness has deposed that he has conducted the investigation

    on behalf of the company and found that the accident had

    taken place due to the rash and negligent driving by the

    driver of the offending vehicle.

    66. According to this witness, as per the terms and

    conditions of the Policy, issued by the Insurance Company

    to the insured, the permit was not valid for plying the vehicle

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS
    38 2026:HHC:31618

    outside the jurisdiction of the permit in other State.

    .

    Issuance and counter signature of the permit was required

    from the State of Himachal Pradesh, as the route area is

    more than 16 kilometers in the State of Himachal Pradesh.

    He has also tendered the documents showing the distance

    of
    from Minus to Fedijpul. As per the document, received from

    Executive Engineer, B&R Division, HPPWD, Chopal, the
    rt
    distance is about 16.64 kilometers, and as per the

    information received form Deputy Divisional Manager,

    HRTC, Shimla, the same is about 18.00 kilometers. In

    addition to this, he has tendered the documents, i.e., copy of

    letters Ex.RW­7/B to Ex.RW­7/K. He has admitted that in

    his report Ex.RW­7/L, he has not mentioned about the date,

    place, and names of the witnesses examined.

    67. So far as the documentary evidence relied upon

    by the respondents is concerned, Ex.RW­1/A, is the inquiry

    report of the accident, in question, which was conducted, in

    pursuance of the office order issued by the Director

    Transport, Himachal Pradesh. Along with the report, copy of

    FIR, photographs of the spot, list of persons expired and

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS
    39 2026:HHC:31618

    injured in the accident, photocopy of the registration

    .

    certificate, copy of insurance policy, temporary authorization

    permit, according to which, the offending vehicle was

    permitted to ply from Vikasnagar to Set No.5, copy of driving

    licence of the driver, along with findings of the committee,

    of
    according to which, the accident had taken place due to the

    negligence on the part of the driver. Ex.RW­6/A is copy of
    rt
    the chargesheet, Ex.RW­7/B is the forwarding letter issued

    by RW­7 to the Divisional Manager, New India Assurance

    Company, according to which, the distance from Minus to

    Fedijpul is 16.64 kilometers. RW­7/F, is the information

    provided by Deputy Divisional Manager, HRTC, Shimla,

    under the Right to Information Act, according to which, the

    distance from Minus to Fedijpul is 18 kilometers and Ex.RW­

    7/L is the investigating report.

    68. Since, in this case, Insurance Company has

    sought the exoneration to indemnify the owner on the

    ground of violation of the Insurance Policy, especially, route

    permit and overloading of the offending vehicle, the said

    provisions are to be interpreted in such a manner to favour

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS
    40 2026:HHC:31618

    the insured, as held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Civil

    .

    Appeal No.of 2026 (Special Leave Petition (Civil)

    No.20645 of 2025), titled as The Oriental Insurance Co.

    Ltd. Versus Durg Roadways Private Ltd. & Others, 2026

    INSC 722. Relevant paragraphs 16 of the judgment, is

    of
    reproduced, as under :­

    “16. Keeping with the beneficial intent, it is a
    rt
    well settled position of law that in case of any
    ambiguity, the interpretation that favours the

    insured must be adopted i.e. the rule of contra
    proferentem. Reference can be made to United
    India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pushpalaya
    Printers15
    , which was followed in Sangrur Sales

    Corpn. v. United India Insurance Co. Ltd.

    6. … It is also settled position in law that if
    there is any ambiguity or a term is capable

    of two possible interpretations, one
    beneficial to the insured should be accepted

    consistent with the purpose for which the
    policy is taken, namely, to cover the risk on
    the happening of certain event…”

    69. Being guided by the above decision of the Hon’ble

    Supreme Court, now, this Court would proceed further to

    determine whether the Insurance Company has successfully

    proved the fundamental breach of the insurance Police, as

    alleged.

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS

    41 2026:HHC:31618

    70. In the present case, the Insurance Company has

    .

    taken a specific plea that the offending vehicle was being

    plied in Himachal area, without valid and effective permit.

    As such, the breach of standard policy conditions has been

    pleaded by the Insurance Company, whereas, owner of the

    of
    vehicle has specifically deposed that the route of the

    offending vehicle was from Vikasnagar to Tiuni. According
    rt
    to him, the small portion of the road is in Himachal Pradesh.

    In the cross­examination by respondent No.2, he has

    categorically stated that the distance covered in Himachal

    Pradesh was 7­8 kilometers, but, in the next line, he has

    deposed that he does not have the proof of the distance

    covered in Himachal Pradesh.

    71. Even, the Administrative Officer of the Insurance

    Company, RW­4, has admitted that the route was

    Vikasnagar to Tiuni, which has starting and terminal point

    in the State of Uttrakhand. When, the suggestion was put to

    this witness that the route covered only 7­8 kilometers

    distance in Himachal Pradesh, he has denied the same by

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS
    42 2026:HHC:31618

    stating that the accident took place 18.5 kilometers inside

    .

    the State of Himachal Pradesh.

    72. Even, the person from the office of Assistant

    Regional Transport Officer, Vikasnagar, i.e. RW­5 has

    deposed that the route permit was valid from 17.6.2015 to

    of
    16.06.2020 and the same has not authorized the owner to

    ply the vehicle in any part of the Himachal Pradesh and the
    rt
    accident had taken place within the territory of Himachal

    Pradesh.

    73. In the cross­examination, this witness has stated

    about the distance of 10 kilometers, which the offending

    vehicle has covered within the territory of Himachal Pradesh.

    This factual position assumes significance as, in terms of

    Section 88 of the M.V. Act, the legislature, in its wisdom, has

    provided the window of 16 kilometers.

    74. This witness has further admitted that the

    starting and terminal point is in State of Uttrakhand and the

    route permit was valid. When, a suggestion was put to this

    witness that the offending vehicle was being plied on the

    prescribed route permit, he has denied that same and stated

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS
    43 2026:HHC:31618

    that the accident had taken place at a distance of 10

    .

    kilometers from Minas in District Shimla. This admission

    nowhere leads to the conclusion that the place of accident is

    more than 16 kilometers from the boundary of Uttrakhand.

    75. The person, who has initially investigated the

    of
    case, has given the distance of place of occurrence from

    Uttrakhand border as 9½ kilometers and via Atal, the
    rt
    distance is about 7 kilometers. Whatsoever has been

    deposed by this person, he has simply stated that he does

    not know the exact distance of the place of accident from

    Uttrakhand border, but, from this admission, it cannot be

    said that the Insurance Company has successfully proved

    that the distance was more than 16 kms.

    76. The Insurance Company has relied upon the

    testimony of RW­7 Shri Prittam Singh Chandel, who, in his

    report Ex.RW­7/L, has admitted that the vehicle was having

    valid permit from 17.06.2015 to 16.6.2020, but, not for the

    area of accident. In the entire report, it has not been

    mentioned that the area, where, the alleged accident had

    taken place, is at a distance of more than 16 kilometers from

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS
    44 2026:HHC:31618

    Uttrakhand border, so, the owner could not take benefit of

    .

    the window provided by the legislature, by way of proviso to

    Section 88 of the M.V. Act.

    77. Section 88 of the MV Act is reproduced as

    under:­

    of

    88. Validation of permits for use outside
    region in which granted.–(1) Except as may
    be otherwise prescribed, a permit granted by the
    Regional Transport Authority of any one region
    rt
    shall not be valid in any other region, unless the
    permit has been countersigned by the Regional

    Transport Authority of that other region, and a
    permit granted in any one State shall not be valid
    in any other State unless countersigned by the
    State Transport Authority of that other State or by

    the Regional Transport Authority concerned:

    Provided that a goods carriage permit, granted by
    the Regional Transport Authority of any one
    region, for any area in any other region or regions

    within the same State shall be valid in that area
    without the countersignature of the Regional

    Transport Authority of the other region or of each
    of the other regions concerned:

    Provided further that where both the starting
    point and the terminal point of a route are situate
    within the same State, but part of such route lies
    in any other State and the length of such part
    does not exceed sixteen kilometres, the permit
    shall be valid in the other State in respect of that
    part of the route which is in that other State
    notwithstanding that such permit has not been
    countersigned by the State Transport Authority or
    the Regional Transport Authority of that other
    State:

    
    
    
    
                                                    ::: Downloaded on - 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS
                                       45                              2026:HHC:31618
    
    
                    xxxx       xxxx                   xxxx
    
    
    
    
                                                                         .
                                                (self emphasis supplied)
    
    
    
    
    
    

    78. Although, in the information obtained under the

    Right to Information Act, from the Regional Manager, HRTC,

    Taradevi, Shimla, which is Ex.RW­7/J, it has been

    of
    mentioned that as per the ETM software, the total distance

    from Menus to Fedizpul is 18 kilometers one side, however,
    rt
    from this report, no benefit can be derived by the Insurance

    Company that from the place of accident, the boundary of

    Uttrakhand is more than 16 kilometers.

    79. Similarly, in the report submitted by the PIO­

    cum­Executive Engineer Division B&R Division, Chopal, the

    distance from Minas to Fedijpul has been mentioned as

    16.64 kilometers. No document has been placed on record

    by the Insurance Company to demonstrate that the distance

    from the place of accident to the boundary of Uttrakhand

    border starting point of boundary of Himachal Pradesh is

    more than 16 kilometers.

    80. On this vague averment, the window, which has

    been provided by the legislature in favour of respondent

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS
    46 2026:HHC:31618

    No.1, cannot be shut down. Even, in the report under

    .

    Section 173 (2) Cr.PC, Ex.RW­6/A, the person, who has

    made a statement under Section 154 Cr.PC, has stated that

    the accident had taken place at a short distance from

    Gumma towards Antroli. From this assertion, it is difficult

    of
    for this Court to conclude that the distance is more than 16

    kilometers from the boundary of Uttrakhand.

    81.
    rt
    In view of the above discussion, made on the

    basis of the statements of RWs, it is not in dispute that the

    starting and terminal point of the route was in the State of

    Uttrakhand. It is not the case of the Insurance Company

    that there are two roads and the vehicle was being plied in

    the road, which was not mentioned in the permit.

    82. In view of the above, learned MACT has wrongly

    held that the offending vehicle was being plied in violation of

    the terms and conditions of the insurance policy. It can also

    be held that the vehicle was being plied as per the terms and

    conditions of the route permit. Report Ex.RW­7/L has

    wrongly been relied upon, without any justification.

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS

    47 2026:HHC:31618

    83. As such, the contentions, so raised in the appeal,

    .

    are liable to be rejected. Consequently, the same are

    rejected.

    84. In view of the discussion made above, this Court

    has no hesitation to hold that the learned MACT has fallen

    of
    into error by fastening the liability to pay the amount of

    compensation upon the owner and also fallen into error by
    rt
    giving the liberty to the Insurance Company to recover the

    amount of compensation, from the owner, after paying the

    same to the petitioners. In a nut shell, the Insurance

    Company has miserably failed to prove the violation of the

    route permit in the present cases.

    85. In this case, it has also been alleged by the

    Insurance Company that the Company is not liable to pay

    the amount of compensation, as, there was overloading in

    the offending vehicle as, against sanctioned sitting capacity

    of 37 passengers, including driver and conductor, 47

    passengers were travelling. To the considered opinion of this

    Court, the above submissions holds no water, as the

    Insurance Company is liable to indemnify the owner to pay

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS
    48 2026:HHC:31618

    the amount of compensation to the petitioners, upto the

    .

    permitted sitting capacity. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in

    National Insurance Co. Ltd. versus Anjana Shyam and

    others, reported in (2007) 7 Supreme Court Cases 445,

    has held that the Insurance Company would be bound to

    of
    cover the higher of the awards and will deposit the higher of

    the amounts of compensation awarded to the extent of the
    rt
    number of passengers covered by the insurance policy.

    Relevant para 22 and 23 of the judgment, are reproduced as

    under:

    “22. Then arises the question, how to determine
    the compensation payable or how to quantify
    the compensation since there is no means of

    ascertaining who out of the overloaded
    passengers constitute the passengers covered

    by the insurance policy as permitted to be
    carried by the permit itself. As this Court has
    indicated, the purpose of the Act is to bring
    benefit to the third parties who are either

    injured or dead in an accident. It serves a social
    purpose. Keeping that in mind, we think that the
    practical and proper course would be to hold
    that the insurance company, in such a case,
    would be bound to cover the higher of the
    various awards and will be compelled to deposit
    the higher of the amounts of compensation
    awarded to the extent of the number of
    passengers covered by the insurance policy.

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS

    49 2026:HHC:31618

    23. Illustratively, we may put it like this. In the
    case on hand, 42 passengers were the

    .

    permitted passengers and they are the ones

    who have been insured by the insurance
    company. 90 persons have either died or got
    injured in the accident. Awards have been

    passed for varied sums. The Tribunal should
    take into account, the higher of the 42 awards
    made, add them up and direct the insurance
    company to deposit that lump sum. Thus, the

    of
    liability of the insurance company would be to
    pay the compensation awarded to 42 out of the
    90 passengers. It is to ensure that the maximum
    benefit is derived by the insurance taken for the
    rt
    passengers of the vehicle, that we hold that the
    42 awards to be satisfied by the insurance
    company would be the 42 awards in the

    descending order starting from the highest of the
    awards. In other words, the higher of the 42
    awards will be taken into account and it would
    be the sum total of those higher 42 awards that

    would be the amount that the insurance
    company would be liable to deposit. It will be for
    the Tribunal thereafter to direct distribution of
    the money so deposited by the insurance

    company proportionately to all the claimants,
    here all the 90, and leave all the claimants to

    recover the balance from the owner of the
    vehicle. In such cases, it will be necessary for
    the Tribunal, even at the initial stage, to make

    appropriate orders to ensure that the amount
    could be recovered from the owner by ordering
    attachment or by passing other restrictive orders
    against the owner so as to ensure the
    satisfaction in full of the awards that may be
    passed ultimately.”

    (self emphasis supplied)

    86. Being guided by the aforesaid decision, this

    Court has no hesitation to hold that the Insurance Company

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS
    50 2026:HHC:31618

    is liable to satisfy the highest awards, to the extent of 37

    .

    passengers, and in rest of the awards, the Insurance

    Company shall, at the first instance, pay the compensation

    amount, with right to recover the same from the owner of the

    offending vehicle.

    of

    87. In view of the above, the appeals preferred by the

    Insurance Company are liable to be rejected, whereas, the
    rt
    appeals preferred by the owner, are liable to be allowed.

    88. The proceedings under the M.V. Act are summary

    in nature, where the liability of the tortfeasor is to be fixed

    on the basis of the preponderance of probability.

    89. Now, the next question, which arises for

    determination, before this Court ,is whether the amount of

    compensation awarded to the petitioners falls within the

    definition of ‘just compensation’, as the endeavour of the

    Court/Tribunal is to grant ‘just compensation’.

    90. The Hon’ble Apex Court in Oriental Insurance

    Company Limited vs. Mohd. Nasir and another, (2009) 2

    SCC (Cri.) 987 has held that the provisions of M.V. Act are

    beneficial piece of legislation and the endeavour of the

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS
    51 2026:HHC:31618

    Court/Tribunal should be to provide “just compensation”.

    .

    The relevant paras 23 and 24 of the judgment are

    reproduced as under:­

    “23. Both, the 1923 Act and 1988 Act are beneficent
    legislation insofar as they provide for payment of
    compensation to the workmen employed by the
    employers and/or by use of motor vehicle by the

    of
    owner thereof and/or the insurer to the petitioners
    suffering permanent disability. The amount of
    compensation is to be determined in terms of the
    provisions of the
    respective Acts. Whereas in terms of the 1923 Act, the
    rt
    Commissioner who is a quasi judicial authority, is
    bound to apply the principles and the factors laid

    down in the Act for the purpose of determining the
    compensation, Section 168 of the 1988 Act enjoins the
    Tribunal to make an award determining the amount of
    compensation which appears to be just.

    24. Both the Acts aim at providing for expeditious relief
    to the victims of accident. In these cases, the accidents
    took place by reason of use of motor vehicles. Both the
    statutes are beneficial ones for the workmen as also

    the third parties. The benefits thereof are available
    only to the persons specified under the Act besides

    under the Contract of Insurance. The statutes,
    therefore, deserve liberal construction. The legislative
    intent contained therein is required to be interpreted
    with a view to give effect thereto.”

    (self emphasis supplied)

    91. This view has again been reiterated by Hon’ble

    Apex Court in Govind Yadav versus The New India

    Assurance Co. Ltd., reported in 2012 ACJ 28 (SC).

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS

    52 2026:HHC:31618

    Relevant paragraphs 12 & 13 of the judgment are

    .

    reproduced as under:

    12. In Reshma Kumari v. Madan Mohan (2009) 13 SCC
    422, this Court reiterated that the compensation awarded

    under the Act should be just and also identified the factors
    which should be kept in mind while determining the
    amount of compensation. The relevant portions of the
    judgment are extracted below:

    of
    “The compensation which is required to be determined
    must be just. While the petitioners are required to be
    compensated for the loss of their dependency, the same
    should not be considered to be a windfall. Unjust
    enrichment should be discouraged. This Court cannot
    rt
    also lose sight of the fact that in given cases, as for
    example death of the only son to a mother, she can
    never be compensated in monetary terms. The question

    as to the methodology required to be applied for
    determination of compensation as regards prospective
    loss of future earnings, however, as far as possible
    should be based on certain principles. A person may

    have a bright future prospect; he might have become
    eligible to promotion immediately; there might have
    been chances of an immediate pay revision, whereas in
    another (sic situation) the nature of employment was

    such that he might not have continued in service; his
    chance of promotion, having regard to the nature of
    employment may be distant or remote. It is, therefore,

    difficult for any court to lay down rigid tests which
    should be applied in all situations. There are divergent
    views. In some cases it has been suggested that some

    sort of hypotheses or guess work may be inevitable.
    That may be so.

    In the Indian context several other factors should be
    taken into consideration including education of the
    dependants and the nature of job. In the wake of
    changed societal conditions and global scenario, future
    prospects may have to be taken into consideration not
    only having regard to the status of the employee, his
    educational qualification; his past performance but also
    other relevant factors, namely, the higher salaries and
    perks which are being offered by the private companies
    these days. In fact while determining the m ultiplicand

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS

    53 2026:HHC:31618

    this Court in Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Jas huben
    held that even dearness allowance and perks with

    .

    regard thereto from which the family would have

    derived monthly benefit, must be taken into
    consideration.

    One of the incidental issues which has also to be taken

    into consideration is inflation. Is the practice of taking
    inflation into consideration wholly incorrect?
    Unfortunately, unlike other developed countries in India
    there has been no scientific study. It is expected that

    of
    with the rising inflation the rate of interest would go up.
    In India it does not happen. It, therefore, may be a
    relevant factor which may be taken into consideration
    for determining the actual ground reality. No hard­and­
    rt
    fast rule, however, can be laid down therefor.”

    (emphasis supplied)

    13. In Arvind Kumar Mishra v. New India Assurance
    Company Limited
    (2010) 10 SCC 254, the Court considered
    the plea for enhancement of compensation made by the
    appellant, who was a student of final year of engineering

    and had suffered 70% disablement in a motor accident.
    After noticing factual matrix of the case, the Court observed:

    “We do not intend to review in detail state of authorities
    in relation to assessment of all damages for personal

    injury. Suffice it to say that the basis of assessment of
    all damages for personal injury is compensation. The

    whole idea is to put the petitioner in the same position
    as he was insofar as money can. Perfect compensation
    is hardly possible but one has to keep in mind that the

    victim has done no wrong; he has suffered at the hands
    of the wrongdoer and the court must take care to give
    him full and fair compensation for that he had
    suffered.”

    (emphasis supplied)

    92. Being guided by the above decisions of Hon’ble

    Supreme Court, now, this Court would proceed further to

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS
    54 2026:HHC:31618

    determine the fact whether the learned MACT has rightly

    .

    assessed the amount of compensation or not.

    FAO (MV) No. 136 of 2020

    93. In the present case, the claimants are son and

    daughter of Maan Singh, who expired in the said accident.

    of
    As per the stand taken by the petitioners, Maan Singh, at

    the time of accident, was about 47 years of age and earning
    rt
    Rs.20,000/­ per month, from vegetables and Rs.20,000/­

    per month from apple orchards.

    94. Learned MACT has taken the monthly income of

    Maan Singh, as Rs.20,000/­ per month. These findings

    have been assailed by the Insurance Company, in the

    present case, as such, the evidence, so adduced, is required

    to be discussed.

    95. Petitioner No.1, tendered his affidavit Ex.PW­1/A,

    which is based upon the assertion made in the petition.

    96. PW­3 Ashok Kumar has been examined by the

    claimants to demonstrate that Maan Singh used to sell apple

    boxes and vegetables in the shop of PW­3. This witness has

    moved a step further by deposing that the deceased used to

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS
    55 2026:HHC:31618

    earn Rs.13 to 14 lacs from his shop. He has also proved the

    .

    bills Ex.PW­1/C­1 to PW­1/C­67. In view of the evidence of

    PW­3, this Court is of the view that the income, which has

    been assessed by the learned MACT cannot be said to be on

    the higher side.

    of

    97. The learned MACT has taken the age of deceased

    Maan Singh, as 44 years. As per the postmortem report, the
    rt
    age of deceased Maan Singh has been mentioned as 44

    years, whereas, the petitioners have pleaded his age as 47

    years. As such, his age is required to be taken as 47 years,

    at the time of accident. Thus, the said findings recorded, by

    the learned MACT, require interference, by this Court

    98. Admittedly, Maan Singh is working in

    unorganized sector, as such, in view of the law laid down by

    the Hon’ble Supreme Court, in National Insurance Co.

    Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi, (2017) 16 SCC 680, 25% increase is

    required to be given, towards future prospects. Thus, by

    adding 25% of his monthly income, the same comes to

    Rs.25,000/­ (Rs.20,000/­ + Rs.5,000/­).

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS

    56 2026:HHC:31618

    99. The learned MACT has rightly deducted 1/3rd of

    .

    the said amount, on account of his personal expenses, had

    he been alive. Thus, his monthly income comes to

    Rs.16668/­. The said findings do not require any

    interference by this Court.

    of

    100. Learned MACT has applied the multiplier of ’14’,

    which is liable to be interfered with, as, the age of the
    rt
    deceased has been held to be 47 years, as such, multiplier of

    ’13’ is required to be applied, in the present case. Thus, the

    loss of contribution comes to Rs.16668/­ x 12 x 13 =

    Rs.26,00,208/­.

    101. So far as the amount awarded under the

    conventional heads are concerned, the said findings do not

    require, any interference, by this Court.

    102. Thus, the entitlement of the petitioners, is

    adjudicated, as under:

    1. Loss of income = Rs. 26,00,208/­

    2. Loss of consortium = Rs.80,000/­

    3. Loss of estate = Rs. 15,000/­

    4. Funeral Expenses = Rs. 15,000 /­
    ________________________________________________________
    Total = Rs.27,10,208/­.

    ________________________________________________________

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS
    57 2026:HHC:31618

    103. So far as the rate of interest is concerned, the

    .

    learned MACT has awarded the interest at the rate of 9%

    per annum, which is on the higher side. As such, the same

    is required to be reduced to 7.5%, in view of the prevailing

    rates of interest of the nationalized banks. Ordered

    of
    accordingly.

    104. Consequently, the present appeal is dismissed,

    however, the
    rt
    awarded amount is reduced from

    Rs.29,10,224/­ to Rs.27,10,208/­, with interest @ 7.5% per

    annum. The award passed by the learned MACT is modified

    accordingly.

    FAO (MV) No.118 of 2020 arising out of MAC Petition No.

    170­MAC/2 of 2017

    105. In the present appeal, the claim petition has been

    filed by the petitioners, being widow, widowed mother, sons

    and daughters of Shri Narayan Singh. As per the petition,

    the deceased was about 29 years of age, at the time of

    accident. He was mason by profession and agriculturist

    also.

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS

    58 2026:HHC:31618

    106. According to the petitioners, deceased Narayan

    .

    Singh, during his life time, was earning amount of

    Rs.21,000/­ per month. Bifurcating the said amount, it has

    been pleaded that the deceased was earning Rs.500/­ per

    day from mason work and Rs.6,000/­ per month from

    of
    agriculture pursuits.

    107. Petitioner No.1, when appeared, in the witness­
    rt
    box, has deposed on the similar lines. In the cross­

    examination, nothing has been put to her to controvert the

    stand taken by her in the affidavit, as well as, in the petition.

    108. By examining PW­3, petitioners have proved that

    Narayan Singh was mason, by profession and earning

    Rs.500/­ per day. This witness has admitted that Narayan

    Singh, was unmarried, but, voluntarily stated that he was

    living in Jodidari with Balbir Singh and Tara Devi. He has

    also admitted that petitioners No.4 to 7 are children of Balbir

    Singh. This is the entire evidence led by the petitioners, on

    this issue.

    109. Learned MACT has taken the monthly income of

    Shri Narayan Singh as Rs.6,000/­ per month. The said

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS
    59 2026:HHC:31618

    findings do not require any interference by this Court, as the

    .

    same are based upon the proper appreciation of evidence, so

    led by the petitioners. The age of the deceased has been

    taken by the learned MACT, as 28 years, on the basis of the

    document Ex.PW­1/A, wherein, the date of birth of the

    of
    deceased has been mentioned as 28.06.1988.

    110. Learned MACT has rightly held only petitioners
    rt
    No.2 and 4, entitled to the amount of compensation. In the

    absence of any appeal, the said findings do not require any

    interference.

    111. Learned MACT has rightly granted the amount of

    Rs.15,000/­, on account of ‘loss of estate’ and Rs.15,000/­

    on account of ‘funeral expenses’, however, has not granted

    any compensation under the head ‘loss of consortium’. In

    view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in

    Magma General Insurance Company Limited vs. Nanu

    Ram @ Chuhru Ram and others, (2018) 18 SCC 130, each

    claimant is entitled to the amount of compensation under

    the head ‘loss of consortium’. As such, petitioners No.2 and

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS
    60 2026:HHC:31618

    4 are held to be entitled to a sum of Rs.40,000/­ each, under

    .

    this head.

    112. Thus, the amount of compensation is required to

    be enhanced and they are entitled to a sum of

    Rs.11,72,400/­ + Rs.80,000/­ = Rs.12,52,400/­.

    of

    113. So far as the rate of interest is concerned, the

    learned MACT has awarded the interest at the rate of 7%
    rt
    and the same requires interference, as all the petitions have

    arisen out of the same accident and in order to maintain

    uniformity, the rate of interest is held to be 7.5% per annum.

    114. Consequently, the present appeal is dismissed,

    by enhancing the awarded amount from Rs.11,72,400/­ to

    Rs.12,52,400/­, with interest @ 7.5% per annum. The

    award passed by the learned MACT is modified accordingly.

    FAO No. 218 of 2023 arising out of MAC Petition No.7­

    S/2 of 2018

    115. In the present appeal, claim petition, was filed by

    sons and daughter of late Katki Devi, who has expired in the

    accident, in question. Her age at the time of accident has

    been pleaded as 44 years and according to the petitioners,

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS
    61 2026:HHC:31618

    she was earning Rs.20,000/­ per month from tailoring work

    .

    and Rs.15,000/­ per month from growing vegetables.

    116. Learned MACT, in the present case, has taken

    the income of Smt. Katki Devi, as Rs.10,000/­ per month.

    The said findings are not sustainable in the eyes of law, as,

    of
    the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Shishu Pal @ Shish Ram &

    Others versus Surjeet & Others, reported in 2026 INSC
    rt
    634, has held that the value of the domestic care of a

    homemaker is liable to be taken as Rs.30,000/­ per month.

    Relevant paragraphs 15 to 20, of the judgment, are

    reproduced as under :­

    Quantifying The Contribution­of a Nation Builder

    15. In usual circumstances this Court would not
    have ventured further than taking note of the fact

    that the incident and judgment in Lata Wadhwa
    (supra) was contemporaneous to the unfortunate
    accident in this case and as such compensation

    could be calculated using the Rs.3000/­ per
    month metric applied therein however, in our
    considered view that would not be justified. It
    has to be observed that to measure the
    contributions of a homemaker and mother as in
    this case in strictly monetary terms is a task of
    considerable difficulty for each and every aspect
    of the day, month and year of such a
    homemaker’s family members is informed,
    shaped by her sometimes acknowledged, but
    most often unacknowledged or taken for granted,
    efforts. If compensation is to be calculated in the

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS
    62 2026:HHC:31618

    present day while accounting for the egregious
    delay, to do so in terms that were frozen on the

    .

    day of the death of the deceased would be

    grossly undervaluing the silent strength of
    homemakers.

    16. That being said, even when it comes to
    computation for damages under non­pecuniary
    heads, the loss still does require the recognition
    of such heads before compensation can be

    of
    awarded. The first of them being the loss of the
    homemaker’s dexterous ability to manage all the
    chores of the household. Granted, that in the
    increasingly modern urban centres of the country
    rt
    it may not be the case that a homemaker stands
    in front of the gas stove bright and early in the
    morning or late at night or even that she walks

    around, slouched, running the broom throughout
    the house, but, the fact of the matter is that in
    smaller cities, towns and villages, even today,
    such tasks assumedly and invariably fall on the

    homemaker, without as much as a second
    thought. The second head pertain to the children
    of the house. They have lost their mother, the
    source of never­ending love, comfort and

    affection, the person who they could run to with
    all their problems, questions and concerns and

    heartbreaks. She is also their first point of
    contact with the ways of the world, silently and
    subtly teaching them skills of survival,

    perseverance and excellence shaping them into
    well rounded human beings capable of being
    functioning contributors to the economy of the
    nation. This, in our view, is somewhat different
    from emotional support or dependence for
    primary skills necessary for everyday functioning
    that are imbibed by the children from their
    mother. This has a distinctly economic angle
    while also being partly an emotional aspect
    perfectly fitting into the non­categorizable roles
    played by homemaker. How does one calculate
    this? The third is equally troubling. A husband

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS
    63 2026:HHC:31618

    has, no longer, the support of his life partner,
    someone he depends on entirely to run smoothly,

    .

    an entire part of his life, his home, family,

    children, relatives. Even in conservative settings
    where patriarchy looms large, the sense of
    dependency that obtains, if taken away, greatly

    challenges the man for he is now directionless
    and suddenly responsible for a lot more than he
    is used to. When the efforts of the homemaker
    towards the husband and children are taken on

    of
    the whole it cannot be disputed that although her
    labour be at emotional or physical is within the
    four walls of the home, its impact is much wider.
    In enabling the direct contribution today of their
    rt
    husbands and tomorrow of their children, they
    are the building blocks for the nation’s road to
    holistic progress.[See: Kalukutty v. P.M. John12,

    Bhuvaneswari v. Mani13] We may also 2023
    SCC OnLine Ker 964 2020 SCC OnLine Mad
    2163 observe that in a recent order of this Court
    in Arvind Kumar Pandey v. Girish Pandey, also

    made similar observations to the following effect:

    “7. It goes without saying that the role of a
    homemaker is as important as that of a family

    member whose income is tangible as a source of
    livelihood for the family. The activities performed

    by a homemaker, if counted one by one, there
    will hardly be any doubt that the contribution of
    a homemaker is of a high order and invaluable.

    In fact, it is difficult to assess such a contribution
    in monetary terms.”

    Any computation made as a result of
    injury suffered or death, should be aware of this
    larger role and not be myopic in its view.

    The loss of a homemaker however is not
    limited to husband and children. It also directly
    impacts the women’s own parents who have
    been deprived of the love and company of their
    child, who have lost the support and comfort of

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS
    64 2026:HHC:31618

    this person and are left alone with this
    boundless grief. Still further, the loss is acutely

    .

    felt by her in­laws who are more often than not

    members of the same household and therefore
    are dependent on the love, labour and dedication
    of this person, for food for medicines and doctor’s

    visit or for even the regular company over a
    morning tea. Strict arithmetic calculation does not
    lend its services to any of these scenarios.

    of

    17. It is settled law by virtue of National
    Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi
    , that in all
    cases that have resulted in death, loss of
    consortium is to be paid to the claimants at the
    rt
    rate of Rs.40,000/­ per dependant along with
    10% increase on the said amount every three
    years, so in 2026 the compensation awarded

    under this head is Rs.48,400/­. This we may
    note is irrespective of whether the deceased is a
    male/female/child/retired/working or whatever
    else. We are of the considered view, in such

    situations the computation of compensation upon
    the death of a homemaker suffers from an
    inherent (2025) 2 SCC 145 (2017) 16 SCC 680
    disadvantage. The amount awarded under the

    same is over and above what is calculated on the
    basis of the earnings/salaries/pension/notional

    income for certain categories of claimants. In
    view of the fact that there is no standard income
    on the basis of which compensation can be

    calculated and a figure is taken for the purposes
    of calculation on guesswork, the true worth of the
    homemaker is missed out, in as much as it is
    amenable to calculation in monetary terms.

    18. Future prospects when calculated on the
    basis of the above judgment in Lata Wadhwa
    (supra) would also be calculated on the
    comparative lower notional income (Rs.3000/­per
    month) given that, both the fire incident and the
    accident forming the basis of this appeal are from
    the year 2001.

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS

    65 2026:HHC:31618

    19. When such conservative figures are used to

    .

    build up compensation, the amount arrived at is

    paltry, and not even close, as much as monetary
    terms can be, to the loss endured by the
    claimants. Notional income is intended to

    approximate the economic value of in the case of
    homemaker, services rendered by them.
    However, for whatever reason, judicial notice of
    this issue is usually overly conservative, without

    of
    due acknowledgment of the fact that the role of
    the homemaker is neither entirely economic nor
    entirely non­economic and blends the factors of
    economy with emotional and managerial
    rt
    contributions and as such fixed compensation in
    terms of loss of consortium does not cover the
    entire gamut of their contribution.

    Loss Of Domestic Care: An Additional Head

    20. It is in these circumstances, that we deem it

    appropriate to direct that when a Motor Accidents
    Claim Tribunal or the High Court or this Court is
    concerned with or a case involving the death of a
    homemaker, in order to overcome the inherent

    disadvantage accrued against the homemaker on
    a calculation of compensation on the basis of

    conservatively computed notional income and
    while being acutely aware of the dictum in
    Pranay Sethi (supra) regarding loss of consortium

    as also the disposition towards uniformity, that
    for the three major heads (the homemaker’s
    contribution towards smooth functioning of the
    household, the loss of maternal support for
    children and loss of spousal support/the support
    and care of their child who is an adult, for the
    parents of the deceased) discussed in the
    foregoing paragraphs, a composite sum of
    Rs.30,000/­ shall be added under the head of
    ‘loss of domestic care’, provided that all three of
    these heads are met in the given case. This
    determination shall be revised by 10%,

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS
    66 2026:HHC:31618

    cumulatively, every three years. It may be clearly
    stated that this amount of Rs.30,000/­ i.e., loss

    .

    of domestic care is to be taken as a ‘stand­ in’

    (basic minimum monthly income) for monthly
    income in those cases where the homemaker
    does not have an input into the house, in strictly

    conventional, monetary terms. In those cases
    where the homemaker is part of the workforce,
    the component of loss of domestic care shall be in
    addition to the monthly income as may be proved

    of
    before the Tribunal/Courts.”

    117. In view of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in
    rt
    National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi, (2017) 16 SCC

    680, and considering the age of deceased Katki Devi, 25%

    increase is required to be given, towards future prospects.

    Thus, by adding 25% towards her monthly income, the same

    comes to Rs.37,500/­ (Rs.30,000/­ + Rs.7,500/­). As such,

    the annual income comes to Rs.4,50,000/­ (Rs.37,500/­ X 12).

    The income tax component is liable to be deducted from the

    said income.

    118. The age of the deceased, at the time of accident was

    held to be 44 years. As per the income tax slab, applicable for

    the financial year 2017­18, income of Rs.2,50,000/­ was

    exempted. Thus, out of Rs.4,50,500/­, the amount of total

    taxable income comes to Rs.2,00,000/­ (Rs.4,50,000/­ minus

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS
    67 2026:HHC:31618

    Rs.2,50,000/­). The said income falls within the tax slab of 5%.

    .

    Thus, the tax component comes to Rs.10,000/­. The education

    cess @4% on the said amount of Rs.10,000/­ is also liable to be

    deducted, which comes to Rs.400/­. Thus, the total tax

    component comes to Rs.10,400/­. Hence, the total established

    of
    annual income of the deceased comes to Rs.4,50,000/­ minus

    Rs.10,400/­ = Rs.4,39,600/­.

    119.
    rt
    Out of the said amount, keeping in view the number

    of dependent, 1/4th amount, on account of her personal

    expenses, is required to be deducted, had she been alive. Thus,

    the loss of contribution comes to Rs.4,39,600/­ minus

    Rs.1,09,900 = Rs.3,29,700/­.

    120. Learned MACT has applied the multiplier of ’11’,

    which is liable to be interfered with, as, the age of the deceased

    has been held to be as 44 years, as such, multiplier of ’14’ is

    required to be applied, in the present case. As such, the

    amount of compensation on account of loss of dependency,

    comes to Rs.3,29,700/­ x 14 = Rs.46,15,800/­.

    121. The amount, which has been awarded to the

    petitioners, under the head, ‘loss of estate’, ‘funeral charges’,

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS
    68 2026:HHC:31618

    and ‘loss of consortium’, does not require any interference by

    .

    this Court.

    122. Thus, the amount of compensation is required to

    be enhanced and the petitioners are entitled to a sum of

    Rs.46,15,800/­.

    of

    123. So far as the rate of interest is concerned, the

    learned MACT has awarded the interest at the rate of 7.5%,
    rt
    the said findings do not require any interference, by this

    Court.

    124. Consequently, the present appeal is dismissed,

    by enhancing the awarded amount from Rs.14,30,800/­ to

    Rs.46,15,800/­, along with interest @ 7.5% per annum. The

    award passed by the learned MACT is modified accordingly.

    FAO (MV) No. 135 of 2020 arising out of MAC RBT Case
    No. 15­S/2 of 2018/2017

    125. The present appeal has been filed by the

    Insurance Company, against the award passed by learned

    MACT(III), Shimla, Camp at Rohru, in MAC RBT Case No.15­

    S/2 of 2018/ 2017, titled as Sangeeta & Another versus Brij

    Mohan Jain & Others.

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS

    69 2026:HHC:31618

    126. The petitioners have filed the said petition, on

    .

    account of death of their mother Reshmi Devi, in the

    accident in question. As per the claim petition, she was

    earning Rs.12,000/­ per month from selling vegetables and

    Rs.5,000/­ per month by selling milk.

    of

    127. Petitioner No.1 Sangeeta has filed her affidavit,

    which is based upon her stand as taken in the petition. In
    rt
    the cross­examination, by the learned counsel appearing for

    respondent No. 2, she has admitted that no document

    regarding the income of her mother has been filed with the

    petition.

    128. PW­4 Vijay Laxmi, deposed that the deceased had

    kept Jersey cows and she used to sell milk and vegetables,

    for her livelihood. She was earning Rs.5,00,000/­ per

    annum.

    129. Learned Tribunal has taken the income of Smt.

    Reshmi Devi as Rs.10,000/­ per month and her age has

    been held to be 38 years.

    130. The age of deceased Reshmi Devi has been

    pleaded by the petitioners, in the petition, as 41 years. As

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS
    70 2026:HHC:31618

    such, the said findings require interference by this Court

    .

    and the age of deceased Reshmi Devi is held to be as 41

    years.

    131. So far as the monthly income of deceased Reshmi

    Devi, is concerned, the said findings also require interference

    of
    by this Court, as in view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble

    Supreme Court in Shishu Pal’s case supra, the value of
    rt
    domestic care of a homemaker is liable to be taken as

    Rs.30,000/­ per month.

    132. In view of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court

    in Pranay Sethi’s and considering the age of deceased

    Reshmi Devi, 25% increase is required to be given, towards

    future prospect. Thus, by adding 25% of her monthly

    income, the same comes to Rs.37,500/­ (Rs.30,000/­ +

    Rs.7,500/­). As such, the annual income comes to

    Rs.4,50,000/­ (Rs.37,500/­ X 12). The income tax

    component is liable to be deducted from the said income.

    133. The age of the deceased, at the time of accident

    was held to be 41 years. As per the income tax slab,

    applicable for the financial year 2017­18, income of

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS
    71 2026:HHC:31618

    Rs.2,50,000/­ was exempted. Thus, out of Rs.4,50,500/­,

    .

    the amount of total taxable income comes to Rs.2,00.000/­

    (Rs.4,50,000/­ minus Rs.2,50,000/­). The said income falls

    within the tax slab of 5%. Thus, the tax component comes to

    Rs.10,000/­. The education cess @4% on the said amount

    of
    of Rs.10,000/­ is also liable to be deducted, which comes to

    Rs.400/­. Thus, the total tax component comes to
    rt
    Rs.10400/­. Hence, the total established annual income of

    the deceased comes to Rs.4,50,000/­ minus Rs.10,400/­ =

    Rs.4,39,600/­.

    134. Out of the said amount, keeping in view the

    number of dependent, 1/3rd amount, on account of her

    personal expenses, is required to be deducted, had she been

    alive. Thus, the loss of contribution comes to Rs.4,39,600/­

    minus Rs.1,46,533 = Rs.2,93,067/­.

    135. Learned MACT has applied the multiplier of ’15’,

    which is liable to be interfered with, as, the age of the

    deceased has been held to be as 41 years, as such,

    multiplier of ’14’ is required to be applied, in the present

    case. The said findings also require interference by this

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS
    72 2026:HHC:31618

    Court. As such, the amount of compensation on account of

    .

    loss of dependency, comes to Rs.2,93,067/­ x 14 =

    Rs.41,02,938/­.

    136. The amount, which has been awarded to the

    petitioners, under the head, ‘loss of estate’, ‘funeral charges’,

    of
    and ‘loss of consortium’, does not require any interference by

    this Court.

    137.
    rt
    Thus, the amount of compensation is required to

    be enhanced and the petitioners are entitled to a sum of

    Rs.41,02,938/­.

    138. So far as the rate of interest is concerned, the

    learned MACT has awarded the interest at the rate of 9%

    and the same requires interference, as, all the petitions have

    arisen out of the same accident and in order to maintain

    uniformity, the rate of interest is held to be 7.5% per annum.

    139. Consequently, the present appeal is dismissed,

    by enhancing the awarded amount from Rs.17,90,120/­ to

    Rs.41,02,938/­, along with interest @ 7.5% per annum. The

    award passed by the learned MACT is modified accordingly.

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS

    73 2026:HHC:31618

    FAO (MV) No. 170 of 2024 arising out of MAC Case
    No.33­S/2 of 2022/19

    .

    140. Insurance Company has filed the appeal against

    the award, passed by the learned MACT, Shimla, in MACC

    No.33­S/2 of 2022/19, titled as ‘Pinki versus Brij Mohan

    of
    Jain & Another’.

    141. The above titled claim petition has been filed, by
    rt
    the petitioner, on account of death of Shri Sohan Lal,

    husband of petitioner. The age of Sohan Lal, at the time of

    accident has been pleaded to be 47 years and in the

    postmortem report his has been mentioned as 48 years and

    the learned MACT has also held the age of deceased to be as

    48 years.

    142. As per the pleadings, he was painter by

    profession and used to grow vegetables on his land. As

    such, he was earning Rs.20,000/­ per month.

    143. In order to prove the said factual position,

    petitioner appeared in the witness­box as PW­1 and filed her

    affidavit Ex.PW­1/A, which is based on the assertions, as

    made in the petition. She has admitted that she has not

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS
    74 2026:HHC:31618

    annexed any documentary proof regarding the proof of

    .

    working, as well as, income of her husband.

    144. The learned MACT has taken the monthly income

    of Shri Sohan Lal, during his life time, as Rs.10,000/­ per

    month. Deposition regarding the income of deceased Sohan

    of
    Lal was made by his wife, who cannot be said to be a

    stranger. When, she has deposed about the income of her
    rt
    husband, in the absence of any evidence, contrary to the

    said factual position, learned MACT has rightly taken the

    income of deceased Sohan Lal as Rs.10,000/­.

    145. In view of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court

    in Pranay Sethi’s and considering the age of deceased

    Sohan Lal, the learned MACT has rightly give 25% increase

    towards future prospects. Keeping in view the number of

    dependents, after deducting 1/3rd amount, towards his

    personal expenses, had he been alive, the learned MACT has

    rightly assessed the monthly income of Sohan Lal as Rs.

    8334/­. The said findings do not require any interference by

    this Court

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS
    75 2026:HHC:31618

    146. Learned MACT has rightly applied the multiplier

    .

    of ’13’, as, the age of the deceased has been held to be as 48

    years. The said findings also do not any require interference

    by this Court.

    147. The amount, which has been awarded to the

    of
    petitioner, by the learned MACT, under the conventional

    heads, i.e., ‘loss of estate’, ‘funeral charges’, and ‘loss of
    rt
    consortium’, does not require any interference by this Court.

    148. So far as the rate of interest is concerned, the

    learned MACT has awarded the interest at the rate of 9%

    and the same requires interference, by this Court, as, all the

    petitions have arisen out of the same accident and in order

    to maintain uniformity, the rate of interest is held to be 7.5%

    per annum.

    149. Consequently, the present appeal is partly

    allowed, by reducing the rate of interest from 9% to 7.5% per

    annum. The award passed by the learned MACT is modified

    accordingly.

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS

    76 2026:HHC:31618

    FAO (MV) No. 119 of 2020 arising out of MAC Petition
    No. 165­MAC/2 of 2017

    .

    150. The above titled appeal has been filed by the

    Insurance Company, against the award dated 05.12.2019,

    passed by learned MACT in MAC Petition No. 165­MAC/2 of

    of
    2017, titled as Tulsa Devi & Others versus Brij Mohan Jain

    & Another,

    151.
    rt
    The petitioners have filed the said petition

    against the respondents, seeking compensation on account

    of death of Shri Jagar Singh, husband of petitioners No.1

    and 2 and father of petitioners No.3 to 6. As per the claim

    petition, Shri Jagar Singh, at the time of his death was 49

    years and he was carpenter by profession and was earning

    Rs.500/­ per day and Rs.6,000/­ per month from

    agriculture pursuits.

    152. Learned MACT, on the basis of the evidence, so

    adduced before it, has taken the income of Shri Jagar Singh

    as Rs.6,000/­ per month.

    153. Petitioner No.1 Tulsa Devi appeared in the

    witness­box as PW­1 and filed her affidavit as Ex. PW­1/A.

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS
    77 2026:HHC:31618

    According to her deposition, her husband was agriculturist

    .

    and carpenter by profession and he was earning Rs.6,000/­

    per month. Petitioner No.1 herself has admitted the income

    of her husband as Rs.6,000/­ and remained silent about the

    income of her husband from other sources. As such, the

    of
    learned MACT has rightly taken his income as Rs.6,000/­

    per month.

    154.
    rt
    Age of Jagar Singh has been mentioned as 50

    years, in the postmortem report and in the petition, it has

    been pleaded as 49 years. As such, the learned MACT has

    rightly taken the age of the deceased as 49 years. The said

    findings do not require any interference, by this Court.

    155. The learned MACT has rightly added 25%,

    towards future prospects, in the monthly income of the

    deceased and deducted 1/4th amount, towards his personal

    expenses. Learned MACT has rightly applied the multiplier

    of ’13’, as the age of the deceased has been held to be 49

    years.

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS

    78 2026:HHC:31618

    156. The learned MACT has rightly awarded a sum of

    .

    Rs. 8,77,500/­, under the head ‘loss of contribution’, and

    the same needs no interference, by this Court.

    157. The learned MACT has also awarded

    compensation to the petitioners, under the conventional

    of
    heads, i.e., ‘loss of estate’, ‘funeral charges’, however, on

    account of ‘loss of consortium’, the learned MACT has
    rt
    awarded compensation only to petitioner No.1. The Hon’ble

    Supreme Court in Nanu Ram‘s case supra, has held that all

    the claimants are also entitled to the compensation, under

    the head ‘loss of consortium’. As such, the said findings

    require interference by this Court.

    158. Consequently, all the claimants are entitled to

    the compensation, which is as under:­

    1. Loss of contribution = Rs.8,77,500/­

    2.Loss of estate = `15,000/­

    3.Funeral expenses= `15,000/­

    4.Loss of consortium= `2,40,000/­ (`40,000 x 6 )
    Total= Rs.11,47,500/­

    159. So far as the rate of interest is concerned, the

    learned MACT has awarded the interest at the rate of 7% per

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS
    79 2026:HHC:31618

    annum. The same needs to be enhanced to 7.5%, as, all the

    .

    petitions have arisen out of the same accident and in order

    to maintain uniformity, the rate of interest is held to be 7.5%

    per annum.

    160. Consequently, the present appeal is dismissed,

    of
    by enhancing the amount of compensation from

    Rs.9,47,500/­ to Rs.11,47,500/­, along with interest @ 7.5%

    per annum.

    rt
    The award passed by the learned MACT is

    modified accordingly.

    FAO (MV) No. 215 of 2023 arising out of MAC Petition
    No.5­S/2 of 2018

    161. Insurance Company has filed the appeal against

    the award, passed by the learned MACT, Shimla, in MAC

    Petition No.5­S/2 of 2018, titled as ‘Subi Devi & Others

    versus Brij Mohan Jain & Others’.

    162. The above titled claim petition has been filed, by

    the petitioners, on account of death of Promila @ Urmila,

    daughter of petitioner No.1 and sister of petitioners No. 2

    and 3. The age of deceased, at the time of accident has been

    pleaded to be as 14 years.

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS

    80 2026:HHC:31618

    163. Learned MACT has taken the notional income of

    .

    Ms. Promila @ Urmila and rightly awarded the

    compensation, to the tune of ₹ 8,00,000/­, with interest @

    7.5% per annum, which findings do not require any

    interference by this Court.

    of

    164. Consequently, the appeal is dismissed.

    FAO (MV) No. 127 of 2025 arising out of MACT Case RBT
    rt
    No.46­R/2 of 2023/17

    165. Respondent No.1­Brij Mohan Jain (owner) has

    filed the appeal against the award, passed by the learned

    MACT, Rohru, District Shimla, in MACT Case RBT No.46­

    R/2 of 2023/17, titled as ‘Akshay Kumar & Others versus

    Brij Mohan Jain & Another’.

    166. The above titled claim petition has been filed, by

    the petitioners, on account of death of Smt. Kiran Devi,

    mother of the petitioners. The age of Kiran Devi, at the time

    of accident, has been pleaded to be 38 years. In the Nakal

    Parivar Register, Ex.PW­1/E, her year of birth has been

    recorded as 1979. As such, her age is proved to be 38 years.

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS

    81 2026:HHC:31618

    167. According to the petitioners, the deceased was

    .

    working as Safai Karamchari in M.C. Rohru and besides

    this, was also a house wife. As such, she was earning

    Rs.13,000/­ per month.

    168. Petitioner No.1, appeared in the witness­box, as

    of
    PW­1 and filed his affidavit, Ex.PW­1/A, in which, he has

    deposed that his mother was working as Safai Karamchari,
    rt
    with M.C. Rohru, on part time basis. Her age, at the time of

    accident was 38 years.

    169. Learned MACT has taken the income of deceased

    Kiran as Rs.10,000/­ per month, whereas, the Hon’ble

    Supreme Court in Shishu Pal’s case supra, has held that

    the value of the domestic care of a homemaker is liable to be

    taken as Rs.30,000/­.

    170. In view of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court

    in Pranay Sethi’s and considering the age of deceased Kiran

    Devi, 40% increase is required to be given, towards future

    prospect. Thus, by adding 40% of his monthly income, the

    same comes to Rs.42,000/­ (Rs.30,000/­ + Rs.12,000/­).

    As such, the annual income comes to Rs.5,04,000/­

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS
    82 2026:HHC:31618

    (Rs.42,000/­ X 12). The income tax component is liable to

    .

    be deducted from the said income.

    171. The age of the deceased, at the time of accident

    was held to be 38 years. As per the income tax slab,

    applicable for the financial year 2017­18, income of

    of
    Rs.2,50,000/­ was exempted. Thus, out of Rs.5,04,000/­,

    the amount of total taxable income comes to Rs.2,54,000/­
    rt
    (Rs.5,04,000/­ minus Rs.2,50,000/­). Out of the said

    amount, Rs.2,50,000/­ falls within the tax slab of 5%,

    whereas, remaining Rs.4,000/­ falls within the tax slab of

    20%. Thus, the tax component comes to Rs.13,300/­. The

    education cess @4% on the said amount of Rs.13,300/­ is

    also liable to be deducted, which comes to Rs.532/­. Thus,

    the total tax component comes to Rs.13832/­. Hence, the

    total established annual income of the deceased comes to

    Rs.5,04,000/­ minus Rs.13832/­ = Rs.4,90,168/­.

    172. Out of the said amount, keeping in view the

    number of dependent, 1/4th amount, on account of her

    personal expenses, is required to be deducted, had she been

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS
    83 2026:HHC:31618

    alive. Thus, the loss of contribution comes to Rs.4,90,168/­

    .

    minus Rs.1,22,542 = Rs.3,67,626/­.

    173. Learned MACT has wrongly applied the multiplier

    of ’14’, since, the age of the deceased has been held to be 38

    years, as such, in view of Sarla Verma’ (Smt) and others

    of
    versus Delhi Transport Corporation and another
    , reported

    in (2009) 6 Supreme Court Cases 121, the multiplier of
    rt
    ’15’ is required to be applied, in the present case. The said

    findings also require interference by this Court. As such,

    the amount of compensation on account of loss of

    dependency, comes to Rs.3,67,626/­ x 15 = Rs.55,14,390/­.

    174. Learned MACT has also awarded compensation

    to the petitioners under the conventional heads, ‘loss of

    estate’, ‘funeral charges’, and ‘loss of consortium’, and also

    awarded 10% increase, after every three years. Such

    approach of the learned MACT is not sustainable, in the eyes

    of law, as the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Pranay Sethi’s

    case supra, has mandated that the said amount will be

    increased from the date of passing of the judgment. The

    judgment, in this case, was passed in the year 2024 and the

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS
    84 2026:HHC:31618

    accident had taken place in the year 2017. As such, the

    .

    petitioners are held entitled to a sum of Rs.15,000/­ under

    the head ‘funeral expenses’, Rs.15,000/­ under the head

    ‘loss of estate’ and Rs.40,000/­ to each of the petitioners,

    i.e., total Rs.2,40,000/­, under the head ‘loss of consortium’.

    of

    175. Thus, the petitioners are entitled to the

    compensation, as under:­
    rt

    1. Loss of contribution = Rs.55,14,390/­

    2.Loss of estate = `15,000/­

    3.Funeral expenses= `15,000/­

    4.Loss of consortium= `2,40,000/­ (`40,000 x 6 )

    Total= Rs.57,84,390/­

    176. So far as the rate of interest is concerned, the

    learned MACT has awarded the interest at the rate of 6%,

    which is required to be enhanced to 7.5% per annum, in

    order to maintain uniformity, as, all the petitions have

    arisen out of the same accident. Ordered accordingly.

    177. Consequently, the present appeal is allowed of,

    by enhancing the awarded amount from Rs.19,01,700/­ to

    Rs.57,84,390/­, with interest @ 7.5% per annum and the

    Insurance Company is held liable to pay the compensation.

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS

    85 2026:HHC:31618

    The order passed by the learned MACT is modified

    .

    accordingly.

    FAO (MV) No. 121 of 2020 arising out of MAC Petition
    No.163­MAC/2 of 2017

    178. Insurance Company has filed the appeal against

    of
    the award, passed by the learned MACT­1, Sirmaur District

    at Nahan, in MAC Petition No.163­MAC/2 of 2017, titled as
    rt
    ‘Bhag Singh & Another versus Brij Mohan Jain & Another’.

    179. The above titled claim petition has been filed, by

    the petitioners, on account of death of their son Shri Dalip

    Singh. The age of Dalip Singh, at the time of accident, has

    been pleaded to be 18 years. According to the petitioners, he

    was earning Rs.400/­ per day, by working as skilled labour

    and Rs.5,000/­ per month from agricultural work.

    180. Petitioner No.2, when appeared in the witness­

    box, as PW­1, deposed that her son was earning Rs.5,000/­

    per month from agricultural work. On the basis of the said

    evidence, the learned MACT has rightly taken the income of

    the deceased as Rs.6,000/­ per month.

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS

    86 2026:HHC:31618

    181. Keeping in view the age of deceased Dalip Singh,

    .

    as well as, the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Pranay

    Sethi‘s case supra and the number of dependents, the

    learned Tribunal has rightly held the monthly income of the

    deceased as Rs. 4200/­. Learned MACT has applied the

    of
    multiplier of ’18’, which is the appropriate multiplier, in the

    present case. Thus, the loss of contribution to the tune of
    rt
    Rs.4200/­ x 12 x 15 = Rs.9,07,200/­ has rightly been

    awarded by the learned Tribunal, needs no interference by

    this Court.

    182. Learned MACT has also awarded compensation

    to the petitioners under the heads, ‘loss of estate’, and

    ‘funeral charges’, however, no amount has been awarded

    under the head ‘loss of consortium’. In view of the law laid

    down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Nanu Ram‘s case

    supra, both the petitioners are entitled to a sum of

    Rs.40,000/­ each, as compensation, under the head ‘loss of

    consortium’.

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS

    87 2026:HHC:31618

    183. Thus, the amount of compensation is required to

    .

    be enhanced and the petitioners are entitled to a sum of

    Rs.9,37,200/­ + Rs.80,000/­ = Rs.10,17,200/­.

    184. So far as the rate of interest is concerned, the

    learned MACT has awarded the interest at the rate of 7% per

    of
    annum. The same needs to be enhanced to 7.5%, as, all the

    petitions have arisen out of the same accident and in order
    rt
    to maintain uniformity, the rate of interest is held to be 7.5%

    per annum.

    185. Consequently, the present appeal is dismissed,

    by enhancing the awarded amount from Rs.9,37,200/­ to

    Rs.10,17,200/­ with interest @ 7,5% per annum. The award

    passed by the learned MACT is modified, accordingly.

    FAO (MV) No. 136 of 2025 arising out of MACT Case RBT
    No.49­R/2 of 2023/17

    186. Respondent No.1­Brij Mohan Jain has filed the

    appeal against the award, passed by the learned MACT,

    Rohru, District Shimla, in MACT Case RBT No.49­R/2 of

    2023/17, titled as ‘Akshay Kumar & Others versus Brij

    Mohan Jain & Another’.

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS

    88 2026:HHC:31618

    187. The above titled claim petition has been filed, by

    .

    the petitioners, on account of death of their father, Shri

    Sanjeev Kumar. As per the claim petition, age of deceased

    Sanjeev Kumar, at the time of accident, was 40 years.

    188. According to the petitioners, the deceased was

    of
    working as Safai Karamchari in N.A.C. Rohru, on part time

    basis and he was earning Rs.13,000/­ per month.

    189.
    rt
    Petitioner No.1, Akshay Kumar appeared in the

    witness­box, as PW­1 and filed his affidavit, Ex.PW­1/A, in

    which, he has deposed that his father was working as Safai

    Karamchari, with N.A.C. Rohru, and also in Hotels and

    shops, on part time basis. He was earning Rs.13,000/­ per

    month. His age, at the time of accident, was 40 years. He

    has admitted that he has no documentary proof that his

    father, during his lifetime, was working as part time Safai

    Karamchari in NAC Rohru.

    190. On the basis of the said evidence, learned MACT

    has taken the income of Shri Sanjeev Kumar as Rs.10,000/­

    per month. In such situation, the material question, which

    arises for determination, before this Court is as to whether

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS
    89 2026:HHC:31618

    the learned MACT, has rightly assessed the monthly income

    .

    of the deceased as Rs.10,000/­ per month, that too, in the

    absence of any documentary proof, in this regard.

    191. The answer to this question is in negative.

    Simply, because the provisions of M.V. Act, are beneficial

    of
    peace of legislation, does not mean that whatsoever, amount

    assessed by the learned MACT, is liable to be affirmed.

    192.
    rt
    Petitioner No.1, has deposed, in his examination­

    in­chief, that his father was earning Rs.13,000/­, per

    month, however, at the same time, he has admitted that he

    is having no documentary proof. In such situation, to the

    considered opinion of this Court, the learned MACT has

    fallen in an error while assessing the monthly income of the

    deceased as Rs. 13000/­ and, in the absence of any

    documentary proof, the monthly income of the deceased,

    during his lifetime, is held to be Rs.7,000/­ per month.

    193. In view of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court

    in Pranay Sethi‘s case supra and considering the age of

    deceased Sanjeev Kumar, 25% increase is required to be

    given, towards future prospects. Thus, by adding 25% of his

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS
    90 2026:HHC:31618

    monthly income, the same comes to Rs.8,750/­ (Rs.7,000/­

    .

    + Rs.1,750/­). Out of the said amount, keeping in view the

    number of dependent, 1/4th amount, on account of his

    personal expenses, is required to be deducted, had he been

    alive. Thus, his monthly income is assessed as Rs. 6562/­.

    of

    194. Learned MACT has applied the multiplier of ’13’,

    which is liable to be interfered with, as, the age of the
    rt
    deceased has been held to be as 40 years, as such, in view of

    the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Sarla

    Verma‘s case supra, multiplier of ’15’ is required to be

    applied, in the present case. Thus, the loss of contribution

    comes to Rs.6,562/­ x 12 x 15 = Rs.11,81,160/­.

    195. So far as the amount of compensation awarded

    under the conventional heads, ‘loss of estate’ and ‘funeral

    charges’, is concerned, no interference is required, whereas,

    the learned MACT has awarded compensation under the

    head ‘loss of consortium’, to each of the petitioners, by

    giving increase of 10% increase, after every three years.

    Such approach of the learned MACT is not sustainable, in

    the eyes of law, as the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Pranay

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS
    91 2026:HHC:31618

    Sethi‘s case supra has mandated that the said amount will

    .

    be increased @ 10% after every three years, from the date of

    passing of the judgment. The judgment, in this case, was

    passed in the year 2024 and the accident had taken place in

    the year 2017. As such, the petitioners are only held

    of
    entitled to a sum of Rs.15,000/­ under the head ‘funeral

    expenses’, Rs.15,000/­ under the head ‘loss of estate’ and
    rt
    Rs.40,000/­ to each of the petitioners, i.e. total

    Rs.2,40,000/­, under the head ‘loss of consortium’.

    196. So far as the rate of interest is concerned, the

    learned MACT has awarded the interest at the rate of 6% per

    annum. The same needs to be enhanced to 7.5%, as, all the

    petitions have arisen out of the same accident and in order

    to maintain uniformity, the rate of interest is held to be 7.5%

    per annum.

    197. Consequently, the present appeal is allowed, by

    reducing the awarded amount from Rs.17,89,200/­ to

    Rs.14,51,160/­, however, the rate of interest is enhanced

    from 6% per annum to 7.5% per annum and the Insurance

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS
    92 2026:HHC:31618

    Company is held liable to pay the compensation. The award

    .

    passed by the learned MACT is modified accordingly.

    FAO (MV) No. 141 of 2024 arising out of MACT Petition
    No.209­N/2 of 2017

    198. Insurance Company has filed the appeal against

    of
    the award, passed by the learned MACT, Paonta Sahib,

    District Sirmaur, in MACT Petition No.209­N/2 of 2017,
    rt
    titled as ‘Santo Devi & Others versus Brij Mohan Jain &

    Another’.

    199. The above titled claim petition has been filed, by

    the petitioners, being mother, widow, son and daughters of

    Shri Surinder Singh, who has expired in the accident, in

    question. As per the claim petition, Surender Singh, at the

    time of his death was 44 years. According to the

    petitioners, the deceased was agriculturist and was earning

    Rs.12,000/­ per month.

    200. Petitioner No.2, Kaushalya Devi, when appeared

    in the witness­box, as PW­1, has deposed that her husband

    was earning Rs.12,000/­ to 15,000/­ per month.

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS

    93 2026:HHC:31618

    Admittedly, she has not produced any documentary proof

    .

    regarding the income of her husband.

    201. Learned MACT has taken the income of deceased

    Surender Singh as Rs.6,000/­ per month. Said approach of

    the learned MACT is not sustainable in the eyes of law, as,

    of
    there was no occasion for the learned MACT to take the

    income of Shri Surender Singh as notional, since, his wife
    rt
    has categorically deposed about his earnings between

    Rs.12,000/­ to Rs.15,000/­ per month. The deposition, on

    oath, cannot be brushed aside, merely, in the absence of

    Jamabandi, as has been held by the learned MACT.

    202. Considering the stand of PW­1, this Court is of

    the view that the ends of justice would be met if the monthly

    income of deceased Surender Singh is taken as Rs.7,000/­

    per month.

    203. In view of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court

    in Pranay Sethi’s and considering the age of deceased

    Surinder Singh, 25% increase is required to be given,

    towards future prospect. Thus, by adding 25% of his

    monthly income, the same comes to Rs.8,750/­ (Rs.7,000/­

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS
    94 2026:HHC:31618

    + Rs.1,750/­). Out of the said amount, keeping in view the

    .

    number of dependent, 1/5th amount, on account of his

    personal expenses, is required to be deducted, had he been

    alive. Thus, his monthly income comes to Rs.7,000/­.

    204. Learned MACT has applied the multiplier of ’14’,

    of
    which is the appropriate multiplier, keeping in view the age

    of the deceased, which is held to be as 44 years. Thus, the
    rt
    loss of contribution comes to Rs.7000/­ x 12 x 14 =

    Rs.11,76,000/­.

    205. So far as the amount of compensation awarded

    under the conventional heads, ‘loss of estate’, ‘funeral

    charges’, and ‘loss of consortium’, is concerned, the learned

    MACT has given the increase of 10%. Such approach of the

    learned MACT is not sustainable, in the eyes of law, as the

    Hon’ble Supreme Court in Pranay Sethi‘s case has

    mandated that the said amount will be increased @ 10%,

    after every three years, from the date of passing of the

    judgment. The judgment, in the present case, was passed in

    the year 2023 and the accident had taken place in the year

    2017. As such, the petitioners are only held entitled to a

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS
    95 2026:HHC:31618

    sum of Rs.15,000/­ under the head ‘funeral expenses’,

    .

    Rs.15,000/­ under the head ‘loss of estate’ and Rs.40,000/­

    to each of the petitioners, i.e. total Rs. 2,80,000/­, under the

    head ‘loss of consortium’.

    206. Viewed thus, the petitioners are held entitled to

    of
    enhanced compensation to the tune of Rs. 11,76,000/­ + Rs.

    15,000/­ + Rs. 15,000/­ + Rs. 2,80,000/­ = Rs. 14,86,000/­.

    207.
    rt
    So far as the rate of interest is concerned, the

    learned MACT has awarded the interest at the rate of 6% per

    annum. The same needs to be enhanced to 7.5%, as, all the

    petitions have arisen out of the same accident and in order

    to maintain uniformity, the rate of interest is held to be 7.5%

    per annum.

    208. Accordingly, the amount of compensation is

    required to be enhanced. Consequently, the present appeal

    is dismissed, by enhancing the awarded amount from

    Rs.12,25,500/­ to Rs.14,86,000/­and rate of interest from

    6% to 7.5 % per annum. The award passed by the learned

    MACT is modified accordingly.

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS

    96 2026:HHC:31618

    FAO (MV) No. 216 of 2023 arising out of MAC Petition
    No.6­S/2 of 2018

    .

    209. Insurance Company has filed the appeal against

    the award, passed by the learned MACT, Shimla, in MAC

    Petition No.6­S/2 of 2018, titled as ‘Subi Devi & Others

    of
    versus Brij Mohan Jain & Others’.

    210. The above noted claim petition has been filed, by
    rt
    the petitioners, on account of death of Radha, daughter of

    petitioner No.1 and sister of petitioners No.2 and 3. The age

    of deceased, at the time of accident, has been pleaded to be

    as 14 years.

    211. Learned MACT has taken the notional income of

    Ms. Radha and has rightly awarded the compensation, to

    the tune of Rs. 8,90,000/­, with interest @ 7.5% per

    annum, which findings, do not require any interference, by

    this Court.

    212. Consequently, the appeal is dismissed.

    FAO (MV) No. 217 of 2023 arising out of MAC Case
    No.38­S/2 of 2017

    213. Insurance Company has filed the appeal against

    the award, passed by the learned MACT(II), Shimla, in MAC

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS
    97 2026:HHC:31618

    Petition No.38­S/2 of 2017, titled as ‘Pinki versus Brij

    .

    Mohan Jain & Another’.

    214. The above noted claim petition has been filed, by

    the petitioners, being widow daughter and son of deceased

    Ramesh Chand. The age of Ramesh Chand, at the time of

    of
    accident, has been pleaded to be 46 years.

    215. As per the claim petition, the deceased was
    rt
    agriculturist and horticulturist and is earning Rs.1,00,000/­

    per month. Elaborating their stand, it has been pleaded

    that he was a progressive horticulturist and an expert

    pruner.

    216. In order to prove the said factual position,

    petitioner No.1, Sarita Devi, appeared in the witness­box as

    PW­1 and deposed that her husband was earning

    Rs.1,00,000/­ per month, by grafting and cutting in the

    apple orchard. PW­2, Bisham Singh Thakur, deposed that

    he used to pay Rs.70,000/­ to 80,0000/­ to Ramesh for

    cutting and pruning. The learned MACT has taken the

    income of Shri Ramesh, during his life time as Rs.9,000/­

    per month, on notional basis. The said findings are not

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS
    98 2026:HHC:31618

    sustainable, in the judicial scrutiny by this Court, as the

    .

    pruning work is seasonal in nature. As such, the income of

    deceased Ramesh, during his life time can be taken as

    Rs.7,000/­ per month.

    217. The petitioners have pleaded the age of deceased

    of
    Ramesh Chand, as 46 years. As per the matriculation

    certificate annexed with the petition, the date of birth of the
    rt
    deceased Ramesh Chand was 04.08.1968. As such, age of

    the deceased was 49 years, at the time of accident.

    218. In view of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court

    in Pranay Sethi’s and considering the age of deceased

    Ramesh Chand, 25% increase is required to be given,

    towards future prospects. Thus, by adding 25% of his

    monthly income, the same comes to Rs.8,750/­ (Rs.7,000/­

    + Rs.1,750/­). Out of the said amount, keeping in view the

    number of dependents, 1/3rd amount, on account of his

    personal expenses, is required to be deducted, had he been

    alive. Thus, his monthly income comes to Rs.5833/­.

    219. Learned MACT has rightly applied the multiplier

    of ’13’, as, the age of the deceased has been held to be as 49

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS
    99 2026:HHC:31618

    years. Thus, the petitioners are entitled to compensation of

    .

    Rs.5833/­ x 12 x 13= Rs.9,09,948/­, under the head ‘loss of

    dependency’.

    220. The amount, which has been awarded to the

    petitioners, by the learned MACT, under the conventional

    of
    heads, i.e., ‘loss of estate’, ‘funeral charges’, and ‘loss of

    consortium’, does not require any interference by this Court.

    rt
    Thus, the total compensation comes to Rs. 9,09,948/­ + Rs.

    15,000/­ + Rs. 15,000/­ + Rs. 1,20,000/­ = Rs.10,59,948/­.

    221. Consequently, the present appeal is partly

    allowed, by reducing the amount of compensation from

    Rs.14,66,172 to Rs.10,59,948/­. The award passed by the

    learned MACT is modified accordingly.

    FAO (MV) No. 239 of 2024 arising out of MAC Petition
    No.55­S/2 of 2019

    222. Insurance Company has filed the appeal against

    the award, passed by the learned MACT(II), Shimla, in MAC

    Petition No.55­S/2 of 2019, titled as ‘Anita & Others versus

    Brij Mohan Jain & Another’.

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS

    100 2026:HHC:31618

    223. The above noted claim petition has been filed, by

    .

    the petitioners, on account of death of Kaku @ Punnu, being

    his widow and parents, in the accident in question. The age

    of Kaku, at the time of accident, has been pleaded to be 23

    years.

    of

    224. As per the claim petition, the deceased was

    painter by profession and also used to grow vegetables. He
    rt
    is stated to be earning Rs.20,000/­ per month from painting

    work and Rs.10,000/­ per month, from the vegetables.

    225. Petitioner No.1, Anita, when appeared in the

    witness­box, as PW­2, has filed her affidavit Ex.PW­2/A, in

    which, she has changed her version, as taken in the claim

    petition, by deposing that her husband used to earn

    Rs.20,000/­ per month from vegetables and Rs.10,000/­ per

    month from painter work.

    226. The learned MACT has taken the income of

    deceased Kaku, during his life time, as per the daily wages

    pertaining to agriculture labourer, in the year 2017, as

    Rs.210/­ per day, or to say Rs.6300/­ per month. The said

    findings do not require any interference by this Court.

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS

    101 2026:HHC:31618

    227. The petitioners have pleaded the age of deceased

    .

    Kaku, as 23 years.

    228. In view of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court

    in Pranay Sethi’s and considering the age of deceased

    Kaku, 40% increase is required to be given, towards future

    of
    prospects. Thus, by adding 40% of his monthly income, the

    same comes to Rs.8,820/­ (Rs.6300/­ + Rs.2,520/­). Out of
    rt
    the said amount, keeping in view the number of dependents,

    1/3rd amount, on account of his personal expenses, is

    required to be deducted, had he been alive. Thus, his

    monthly income comes to Rs.5880/­. The said findings

    require interference by this Court.

    229. Learned MACT has applied the multiplier of ’18’.

    Keeping in view the age of the deceased, the said multiplier

    is the appropriate multiplier. Thus, the petitioners have

    rightly been held entitled to compensation of Rs.5880/­x12 x

    18= Rs.12,70,080/­, under the head ‘loss of dependency’.

    230. The learned MACT has rightly awarded

    compensation under the conventional heads, i.e., ‘loss of

    estate’, and ‘funeral charges’, however, the learned MACT

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS
    102 2026:HHC:31618

    has awarded compensation under the head ‘loss of

    .

    consortium’, only to one petitioner, which is required to be

    awarded to all the petitioners, as per the mandate of the

    Hon’ble Supreme Court in Nanu Ram‘s case supra.

    231. Thus, the petitioners are held entitled to the

    of
    compensation, as under:­

    1. Loss of income
    rt = Rs. 12,70,080/­

    2. Loss of consortium = Rs.1,20,000/­

    3. Loss of estate = Rs. 15,000/­

    4. Funeral Expenses = Rs. 15,000 /­

    ________________________________________________________
    Total = Rs.14,20,080/­.

    ________________________________________________________

    232. So far as the rate of interest is concerned, the

    learned MACT has awarded the interest at the rate of 9%

    and the said findings require interference, by this Court, as,

    all the petitions, have arisen out of the same accident and in

    order to maintain uniformity, the rate of interest is held to

    be 7.5% per annum.

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS

    103 2026:HHC:31618

    233. Consequently, the present appeal is partly

    .

    allowed, by enhancing the amount of compensation from

    Rs.13,40,080/­ to Rs.14,20,080/­, along with interest @

    7.5%. The award passed by the learned MACT is modified

    accordingly.

    of
    FAO (MV) No. 240 of 2024 arising out of MAC Petition
    No.41­S/2 of 2019

    234.
    rt
    Insurance Company has filed the present appeal

    against the award, passed by the learned MACT(II), Shimla,

    in MAC Petition No.41­S/2 of 2019, titled as ‘Kamla &

    Others versus Brij Mohan Jain & Another‘.

    235. The above titled claim petition has been filed, by

    the petitioners, seeking compensation, on account of death

    of Ajab Singh, being his widow, daughter, son and widowed

    mother, in the accident in question. The age of Ajab Singh,

    at the time of accident, has been pleaded to be as 38 years.

    236. As per the claim petition, the deceased was

    painter by profession and also used to grow vegetables. He

    is earning Rs.15,000/­ per month from painting work and

    Rs.10,000/­ per month, from the vegetables.

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS

    104 2026:HHC:31618

    237. In order to prove the above factual position,

    .

    petitioner No.1, appeared in the witness­box, as PW­2, and

    filed her affidavit Ex.PW­2/A, in which, she has again

    asserted the fact that her husband was a painter by

    profession and earning Rs.15,000/­ per month, by painting

    of
    working and Rs.10,000/­ by growing vegetables.

    238. The learned MACT has taken the income of
    rt
    deceased Ajab Singh, during his life time, as per the daily

    wages pertaining to agriculture labourer, in the year 2017,

    as Rs.210/­ per day, or to say Rs.6300/­ per month. The

    said findings do not require any interference by this Court.

    239. The petitioners have pleaded the age of deceased

    Kaku, as 38 years.

    240. In view of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court

    in Pranay Sethi‘s case and considering the age of deceased

    Ajab Singh, 40% increase is required to be given, towards

    future prospect. Thus, by adding 40% of his monthly

    income, the same comes to Rs.8,820/­ (Rs.6300/­ +

    Rs.2,520/­). Out of the said amount, keeping in view the

    number of dependents, 1/4th amount, on account of his

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS
    105 2026:HHC:31618

    personal expenses, is required to be deducted, had he been

    .

    alive. Thus, his monthly income comes to Rs.6615/­. The

    said findings do not require any interference, by this Court.

    241. Keeping in view the age of the deceased, the

    learned MACT has rightly applied the multiplier of ’15’ and

    of
    has rightly held the petitioners entitled to compensation to

    the tune of Rs.6615/­x12x15= Rs.11,90,700/­, under the
    rt
    head ‘loss of dependency’.

    242. The compensation has been awarded to the

    petitioners, by the learned MACT, under the conventional

    heads, i.e., ‘loss of estate’, and ‘funeral charges’, however,

    the learned MACT has awarded compensation under the

    head ‘loss of consortium’, only to one petitioner, which is

    required to be awarded to all the petitioners, as pet the

    mandate of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Nanu Ram‘s case

    supra.

    243. Thus, the petitioners are entitled to the

    compensation, as under:­

    1. Loss of income = Rs. 11,90,700/­

    2. Loss of consortium = Rs.1,60,000/­

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS
    106 2026:HHC:31618

    3. Loss of estate = Rs. 15,000/­

    .

    4. Funeral Expenses = Rs. 15,000 /­

    ________________________________________________________
    Total = Rs.13,80,700/­.

    ________________________________________________________

    244. So far as the rate of interest is concerned, the

    of
    learned MACT has awarded the interest at the rate of 9%

    and the said findings require interference, by this Court, as,
    rt
    all the petitions, have arisen out of the same accident and in

    order to maintain uniformity, the rate of interest is held to

    be 7.5% per annum.

    245. Consequently, the present appeal is partly

    allowed, by enhancing the amount of compensation from

    Rs.12,60,700/­ to Rs.13,80,700/­, along with interest @

    7.5%. The award passed by the learned Tribunal is modified

    accordingly.

    246. Parties are left to bear their own costs.

    247. Memo of costs be prepared accordingly.

    248. Record be sent back.

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS

    107 2026:HHC:31618

    249. Copy of the judgment be placed on the files, in

    .

    the connected appeals.

    (Virender Singh)

    Judge
    30th July, 2026 (rajni/ps)

    of
    rt

    ::: Downloaded on – 30/07/2026 20:36:14 :::CIS



    Source link

    LEAVE A REPLY

    Please enter your comment!
    Please enter your name here