The Himachal Pradesh High Court on Thursday enhanced the compensation awarded to the family of a chowkidar who died after taking a lift in a Border Roads Organisation tanker. Justice Vivek Singh Thakur, hearing the appeal filed by the Union of India, held that the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT) had awarded compensation on the lower side and recalculated it based on legal principles of dependency and future income prospects. The courtroom atmosphere was steady and focused, with both sides repeating their earlier arguments, but the bench steered directly toward the core issue-fair compensation.
Read also: Supreme Court Extends Pre-Arrest Bail to Arif Merchant, Directs Faster Trial in Mumbai Fraud Case
Background
The case centers around the death of Halku Ram, a 36-year-old chowkidar serving in the IPH Department at Kelong. On February 2, 2007, he reportedly took a lift in a tanker vehicle (99E-61171) belonging to the GREF unit. The vehicle rolled down nearly 30 meters near Villing Nallah, causing severe injuries. He was taken from Kelong to Kullu, and then to IGMC Shimla, where he passed away on February 6.
His wife Kiran Bala, mother Chamari Devi, and two minor children filed a claim under the Motor Vehicles Act, seeking ₹20 lakh as compensation. They argued the accident resulted from the driver’s negligent handling of the tanker. The MACT, after examining evidence, awarded ₹13,77,000 with 9% interest.
Read also: Supreme Court Quashes Maharashtra's 'Private Forest' Land Tags, Says State Failed to Prove Due
The Union of India appealed, insisting that the deceased had voluntarily taken the lift and submitted an affidavit stating his family would not claim compensation. They also argued the compensation granted was excessive.
Court’s Observations
Justice Thakur did not accept the affidavit relied upon by the government. “There is no reliable proof that the affidavit was executed properly or voluntarily,” the bench observed. The judge noted that the document was a photocopy, lacked supporting testimony, and seemed unlikely considering the critical condition of the injured at the time.
The Court added that even if such an affidavit were genuine, no one can surrender the legal rights of their dependents by self-declaration. “A person may waive his own legal entitlement, but he cannot deprive his family of lawful compensation,” the bench remarked.
During reasoning, the Court recalculated the compensation based on the deceased’s undisputed salary of ₹6,400 per month, added 50% for future income prospects (as per Supreme Court rulings in Pranay Sethi and Magma General Insurance cases), deducted only one-fourth for personal expenses given four dependents, and applied multiplier of 15. Additional sums were fixed for funeral expenses, loss of estate, and loss of consortium for each family member.
Decision
The Court modified the award and directed that the family be paid ₹14,86,000 along with 7.5% annual interest from the date of the accident. The compensation is to be divided with 50% to the wife, 10% to the mother, and 20% each to the two children. The appeal was disposed of accordingly.
Case Title: Union of India & Another vs. Kiran Bala & Others
Court: High Court of Himachal Pradesh, Shimla
Case Type: FAO (MVA) No. 503 of 2015
Subject: Motor Accident Compensation Appeal
Judge: Hon’ble Justice Vivek Singh Thakur
Decision Date: 30 October 2025
