Punjab & Haryana High Court Enhances Compensation to ₹25.66 Lakh in Fatal Accident, Corrects Multiplier and Future Prospects Calculation
Case Name: The New India Assurance Company Ltd. v. Balvir Kaur (Deceased) through LRs and Others; Balvir Kaur (Deceased) through LRs and Another v. Lakhwinder Singh @ Lakha (Deceased) through LRs and Others
Date of Judgment: October 9, 2025
Citation: FAO-1403-2020 & FAO-3-2022
Bench: Hon’ble Mrs. Justice Alka Sarin
Held: The Punjab & Haryana High Court partly allowed the cross-appeals filed by the Insurance Company and the claimants, modifying the compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ferozepur, in a fatal accident case. Justice Alka Sarin held that the Tribunal had erred in applying a multiplier of 17 instead of 16 and in granting 50% addition for future prospects despite the deceased not being in permanent employment. The Court corrected these errors and re-calculated the compensation accordingly, while also enhancing the amounts under conventional heads to align with Pranay Sethi, Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd., and N. Jayasree.
Summary: The case arose from the death of Gurmukh Singh in a motor accident on April 15, 2017. The Tribunal had awarded ₹27.86 lakh compensation with 7% annual interest, applying a multiplier of 17 and 50% addition for future prospects. The Insurance Company challenged the award, arguing that the deceased’s age was 31 years and six months as per documentary evidence (Ex.CW3/E), warranting a multiplier of 16. It also contended that future prospects should have been limited to 40% as the deceased was not a permanent employee.
The claimants filed a separate appeal seeking enhancement, contending that the Tribunal wrongly deducted 50% towards personal expenses despite three dependents and that compensation under consortium and other heads was inadequate.
Justice Sarin held that the deceased’s age should be determined as per Ex.CW3/E, a document signed by the deceased himself, fixing his age at 31 years and six months. Accordingly, the correct multiplier was 16. The Court accepted the Insurance Company’s contention that the addition towards future prospects should be 40%, not 50%. However, it upheld the deduction of 50% for personal expenses, as there was no evidence that the deceased’s adult brother was dependent on him.
At the same time, the Court enhanced compensation under conventional heads — granting ₹18,000 each towards loss of estate and funeral expenses, and ₹48,000 each towards consortium for the dependents.
The recalculated total compensation amounted to ₹25,66,272, including future prospects and conventional heads, as opposed to ₹27,86,515 initially awarded by the Tribunal.
Decision: The High Court modified the Tribunal’s award, holding that the correct compensation payable to the claimants was ₹25.66 lakh with 7% annual interest. Both appeals — FAO-1403-2020 by the Insurance Company and FAO-3-2022 by the claimants — were disposed of in these terms.