FARZANA BEGAM & ANR. vs SH DEVENDRA & ORS.

Judgment text excerpt

$~52 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision: 20th May 2026. + MAC.APP. 298/2026, CM APPL. 29931-29932/2026 FARZANA BEGAM & ANR. .....Appellants Through: Mr. S N Parashar, Advocate with Mr. Ritik Singh, Advocate. versus SH DEVENDRA & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. JPN Shahi, Advocate for R-3. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANISH DAYAL JUDGMENT % ANISH DAYAL, J (ORAL): 1. This appeal has been filed by claimants seeking enhancement of compensation awarded at Rs. 5,98,500/- by impugned judgment dated 23rd December 2026, passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal East District, Karkardooma (‘MACT/Tribunal’), in MACT No. 386/2016, arising out of an accident that occurred on 31st August 2014 near Madina Masjid, Ashok Vihar, Loni, wherein the deceased, Mohd. Shahruk, aged 18 years, while riding his motorcycle, was hit by the offending vehicle/bus bearing registration No. UP-17B-3901. The claim petition was filed by the parents of the deceased. 2. Mr. S.N. Parashar, counsel for claimants, contends that the MACT applied a multiplier of ‘13’ on the basis of the age of the mother Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:RAHUL KUMAR CHOUDHARY MAC. APP. 298/2026 Page 1 of 4 Signing Date:22.05.2026 13:31:38 instead of adopting the multiplier of ‘18’ for the age group 15-20 years, in terms of the principles enunciated in Smt. Sarla Verma & Ors v. Delhi Transport Corporation & Anr. (2009) 5 SCC 121 and National Insurance Company v. Pranay Sethi & Ors. (2017) 16 SCC 680. 3. The Supreme Court in the case of Reshma Kumari v. Madan Mohan (2013) 9 SCC 65, held that the multiplier is to be used with reference to the age of the deceased. The Constitution Bench in Pranay Sethi (supra), affirmed the view taken in Smt. Sarla Verma (supra), and Reshma Kumari (supra), and r