GROUNDS OF APPEAL

1. That the impugned award dated 16.03.2018,

passed by Learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,

Yamuna Nagar at Jagadhri, wherein a meager sum of

compensation has been awarded in favour of the

appellant, is liable to be modified.

2. That in the present case the accident had

occurred on 04.08.2016, wherein deceased Shubham,

son of appellant, died in a motor vehicle accident due to

rash and negligent act of respondent No.1.

3. That FIR No.149 dated 04.08.2016 , under

sections 279 & 304-A IPC was got registered in Police

Station Radaur, Yamuna Nagar regarding this accident .

The appellant being mother of the deceased had filed a

claim petition before learned M.A.C.T. Yamuna Nagar at

Jagadhri.

4. That the learned Tribunal vide its impugned

award dated 16.03.2018 had recorded a positive finding

that the accident had occurred due to rash and

negligent driving of respondent No.1 and had

accordingly awarded a sum of Rs. 9,37,200/- as

compensation to the appellant.

5. That while assessing compensation, learned

Tribunal has assessed monthly income of the deceased

@ Rs.6000/- per month and after deducting 50% amount

for personal expenses of the deceased, annual loss of

income to the appellant was assessed to be Rs. 3000/-

per month and by applying a multiplier of 1 8, the

amount was assessed @ Rs. 09,07,200/-. On account of

loss of loss of estate only Rs.15,000/- has been awarded

and Rs.15,000/- towards last rites.

6. That the learned Tribunal has failed to

appreciate the evidence o n record. The Ld. Tribunal has

failed to appreciate that deceased was running a pig

diary and thereby earning a sum of Rs. 20,000/- per

month. It is necessary to submit here that as per the

appellant evidence deceased was hale and hearty &

earning Rs.20,000/- and he was an income tax payee.

The claimant has also produced document Ex.C1 i.e

income tax return of deceased Shubham, which reflects

his total income of the assessment year 2014-15 at

Rs.1,92,400/- in support of earning of deceased & this

fact was gone un-rebutted but this evidence has been

ignored by Ld. Tribunal while assessing the income of

the deceased.
7. That the self expenditure of the deceased

could not have been taken to be more than 1/ 3 t h of the

income and accordingly, the dependency should have

been assessed as 4/5 t h of the total income.

8. That the compensation awarded on account of

funeral expenses is on lower side and nothing has been

awarded on account of transportation . The learned

Tribunal should have granted reasonable compensation

for loss of estate separately to both appellant . Besides

it, less compensation has been awarded for loss of love

and affection for the appellant .

9. That the learned Tribunal has awarded

interest @ 7% per annum. So, considering the present

economic scenario, interest should have been awarded

@ 18% per annum on the amount of compensation

assessed by the learned Tribunal, that too from the date

of accident instead of the date of filing of the claim

petition.

10. That the whole approach of the Ld. MACT is

illegal, against facts, contrary to law and is thus, liable

to be modified.
11. That the appellant h as not filed any such or

similar appeal before this Hon’ble Court or the Hon’ble

Supreme Court of India.

It is therefore, respectfully prayed that in

view of the submissions made above, the present

appeal may kindly be allowed and the award dated

16.03.2018, passed by the learned M.A.C.T. Yamuna

Nagar at Jagadhri may kindly modified and the

appellants be awarded compensation of Rs. 20.00 lacs

alongwith interest @ 18% per annum from the date of

accident till realization or any other suitable amount

which this Hon’ble Court deems proper, in the interest

of justice and equity.

Chandigarh
Dated: 01.11.2018 (Namit Khurana) (Sunny Dhull)
Advocates
Counsels for the appellant
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH.

FAO No._____________ of 201 8

Aman Kaur …Appellant

Versus

Shokin & others …Respondents

Affidavit of Aman Kaur, wife of Sh. Gurmeet Singh,

resident of village-Chhotabans, Post Office- Radaur,

Tehsil Radaur, District Yamunanagar.

I, the above named deponent do hereby solemnly

affirm and declare as under:-

1. That the deponent is filing the accompanying

grounds of appeal in this Hon’ble High Court and is well

conversant with the facts of the same.

2. That the facts narrated in the grounds of

appeal in paras no.1 to 1 1 are true and correct to my

knowledge and based on legal advice. No part of it is

false and nothing has been kept concealed therein.

3. That the deponent has not filed any such or

similar appeal before this Hon’ble Court or the Hon’ble

Supreme Court of India.

Chandigarh.
Dated: 01.11.2018 Deponent

VERIFICATION:

Verified that the contents from paras No.1 to

3 of my above affidavit are true and correct to my
knowledge. No part of it is false and nothing has been
concealed therein.
Chandigarh.
Dated: 01.11.2018 Deponent

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND

HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.
F.A.O. No________ of 2018

MEMO OF PARTIES

Aman Kaur, age about 48 years, wife of Sh. Gurmeet

Singh, resident of village-Chhotabans, Post Office-

Radaur, Tehsil Radaur, District Yamunanagar.

Appellant. Versus

l. Shokin son of Sh. Babu Khan, resident of village -

Niyajipur Kotwali, Muzaffar Nagar (UP) (Driver of

offending vehicle i.e. Mahindera Pick-up No.HR56-A-

1991).

2. Sunil Kumar son of Sh. Ram Diya, resident of village-

Mandi Kalan, District Jind (Owner of offending vehicle

i.e. Mahindera Pick-up No.HR56-A-1991).

3. The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Opp. BDO

Office, Jind Road, Safidon, District Jind through its

Branch Manager (Insurer of offending vehicle i.e.

Mahindera Pick-up No.HR56-A-1991).

…Respondents.

Chandigarh
Dated: 01.11.2018 (Namit Khurana) (Sunny Dhull)
Advocates
Counsels for the appellant
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH.

FAO No._____________ of 201 8

Aman Kaur …Appellant

Versus

Shokin & others …Respondents

I N D E X

Sr. Particulars Dated Page Court

No. s fees

1. Application for 01.11.201

condonation of 8
delay
2. Affidavit 01.11.201
8
3. Grounds of Appeal 01.11.201
8
4. Affidavit 01.11.201
8
5. Memo of parties 01.11.201
8
6. Impugned Award 16.03.201
8
7. Power of Attorney 01.11.201
8
8. Impugned Award 16.03.201
8
Total court fees Rs.

Note: Whether any caveat petition

has been filed or not: No

Any other case: Nil

Nature of Case: Death Case

Chandigarh
Dated: 01.11.2018

(Namit Khurana)(Sunny Dhull)

P-2739/2010 P-
Advocates
Counsels for the appellants
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH.

FAO No._____________ of 201 8

Aman Kaur …Appellant

Versus

Shokin & others …Respondents

TOTAL COURT FEES AFFIXED

Chandigarh
Dated: 01.11.2018 (Namit Khurana) (Sunny Dhull)
Advocates
Counsels for the appellant
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH.

C.M. No.__________OF 2018

In
FAO No._____________ of 201 8

Aman Kaur …Appellant

Versus

Shokin & others …Respondents

Application U/S 5 of the Limitation Act with a

prayer for condonation of delay of days in filing
the appeal.

RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:

1. That the present appeal is being filed before this

Hon’ble Court and the same is likely to succeed on the

grounds stated therein. The contents of the appeal may

be read as part of this application.

2. That the present appeal is being filed against the

award dated 16.03.2018, passed by learned MACT,

Jagadhri. After the death of her son , the applicant

suffered mental trauma. The applicant is living at the

mercy of others and she could not have knowledge that

appeal can also be filed against the impugned award . In

last week of October, 2018, the applicant was told

about this fact by one of her neighbor and then she

contacted her counsel in District Courts at Jagadhri for

purpose of filling appeal and collected the relevant

papers and thereafter met h er counsel at Chandigarh

and immediately thereafter appeal has been filed

without causing any further delay.

3. That on account of the facts and

circumstances narrated above, delay of days has

occurred in filing the appeal.

4. That the delay in filing the appeal is neither

intentional nor willful but has occurred due to bonafide

reasons which w as beyond the control of the appellant.

Even the appellant ha s not gained illegal benefit by

causing such delay.

It is therefore, respectfully prayed that the

present application may kindly be allowed and the delay

of days in filing the present appeal may kindly be

condoned and the appeal may kindly be heard on merit

in the interest of justice and equity.

NOTE: Affidavit is attached.

Chandigarh
Dated: 01.11.2018 (Namit Khurana) (Sunny Dhull)
Advocates
Counsels for the appellant
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH.

C.M. No.__________OF 2018

In
FAO No._____________ of 201 8

Aman Kaur …Appellant

Versus

Shokin & others …Respondents

Affidavit of Aman Kaur, wife of Sh. Gurmeet Singh,

resident of village-Chhotabans, Post Office- Radaur,

Tehsil Radaur, District Yamunanagar.

I, the above named deponent do hereby solemnly

affirm and declare as under:-

1. That the deponent is filing the accompanying

application for condonation of delay in this Hon’ble High

Court and is well conversant with the facts of the same.

2. That the facts narrated in the application in paras

no.1 to 4 are true and correct to my knowledge and based on

legal advice. No part of it is false and nothing has been kept

concealed therein.

Chandigarh
Dated:01.11.2018

Verification :

Verified that the contents of paras No.1 & 2 of the

affidavit are true and correct to my knowledge. No part
of it is false and nothing has been concealed therein.
Chandigarh
Dated:01.11.2018
 Aman Kaur Versus Shokin etc.

MEMO OF COSTS

Sr. No Petitioner Respondents

1. Stamp for petition 25.00 0.00

2. Stamp for Power 2.00 4.00
3. Counsel’s fee 1100.00 1100.00
4. Sub. Of Witnesses 500.00 150.00
5. Local Commissioner Fee 0.00 0.00
6. Process Fee 52.00 7.00
7. Misc. 20.00 20.00
8. Total 1699.00 1274.00

Given under my hand and the seal of the court this

16 t h day of March, 2018

Sd/-
(Naresh Katyal),
Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal ,
Yamuna Nagar at Jagadhri

True copy

(Advocate)