Omi Devi @ Omwati and Ors v. Swaran Singh and Anr

IN

Smt. Omi Devi

Swaran Singh a

CORAM: HO

Present: Mr

Mr

Mr

SUDEEPTI SH

1.

The

09.01.2007 pass the learned Mo enhancement of family members FACTS NOT IN

2.

The 50 years, was r Police Departm station City Da

N THE HIGH COURT OF PUN

AT CHANDIG

FAO-1404-2007

Date of Decisio alias Omwati

Vs.

and another

ON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUDE r. Malwinder Singh Sidhu, Advoc r. Amaninder Preet, Advocate for r. Vinod Chaudhary, Advocate fo

---- HARMA J. (ORAL) e present appeal has been pr sed in the claim petition filed u tor Accident Claims Tribunal, f compensation granted to the s of the deceased. N DISPUTE e brief facts of the case are that regular employee of the State ment. He was posted as Assist abwali, District Sirsa and was

NJAB & HARYANA GARH 7 (O&M) on: September 27, 2024

......Appellant(s)

......Respondent(s) EEPTI SHARMA cate for the appellant. r respondent No.1. r respondent No.2-Insurance Co referred against the award da under Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 Sirsa (for short, 'the Tribunal') claimants/appellants, who are t Zile Singh (since deceased), ag of Haryana and was serving w tant Sub Inspector (ASI) in po getting Rs.15,000/- per month

. ated by for ged with lice

salary besides t Zile Singh along near Sem Nala Zile Singh wa whereas Jagdish Chander at abo Canter (bearing office being dri manner. He stee Zile Singh. Re Jagdish Chande Zile Singh was however, died a registered at Po of the canter in q

3.

Up the factum of co

4.

Fro issues:-

the facilities of accommodation g with Jagdish Chander Constab at the Petrol Pump of M/s Han s traveling by his scooter be h Chander was having a bicyc out 7:25 PM heading towards th g registration No.RJ-2G-2173) iven by respondent No.1 Swar ered the canter on wrong side and espondent No.1 fled with the ca er Constable informed the police brought to General Hospital, after some time due to the injuri olice Station City Dabwali. Res question and same was insured w on notice of the claim petition, ompensation. om the pleadings of the parties,

¶1Whether the accident i rash and negligent driving of 02G-2173 by respondent No 6? OPP

¶2If issue No.1 is proved are entitled for compensat whom? OPP

and free uniform. On 26.11.20 ble was on patrol duty on Sirsa ro ns Raj Sudarshan Kumar Dabw aring registration No.HR-25/9 cle. Zile Singh overtook Jagd he office of Canter Union whe came from the side of the Un ran Singh in a rash and neglig d resultantly, it struck the scoote anter after causing the accident e Station on telephone and inju Dabwali in a police vehicle. ies. FIR regarding the accident w pondent No.1 himself is the ow with respondent No.2. , respondents appeared and den the Tribunal framed the follow in question took place as a resul f canter bearing registration No. o.1 and father of petitioners No.2 d, whether the claimants-petition tion, if so, how much and fr

oad wali. dish en a nion gent r of and ured He, was wner nied wing lt of RJ-2 to ners

5.

Aft record, the lear alongwith intere present appeal f SUBMISSIONS

6.

Lea assessed by the learned Tribuna Rs.9,322/- per erroneously app prospects, loss present appeal b

7.

Per vehemently arg compensation as

8.

I h record of this ca

¶3Whether the petitioner claim petition? OPR

¶4Whether respondent N a valid and effective drivin question bearing registratio alleged accident, if so to wha

¶5Whether the claim p present form? OPR

¶6Relief.

ter taking into consideration th rned Tribunal awarded compens est @ 7.5% per annum. Hence for enhancement of compensation S OF THE COUNSELS arned counsel for the claimants-learned Tribunal is on the lowe al has wrongly assessed the m month. He further contends plied multiplier 7 instead of of consortium and funeral expe be allowed and compensation sho r contra, learned counsel for th gues that the award has rightly s assessed by the learned Tribuna have heard learned counsel for ase.

rs have no cause of action to file No.1 Sawran Singh was not hold ng licence to drive the canter on No.RJ-2G/2173 at the time at effect? OPR 2 etition is not maintainable in he pleadings and the evidence sation to the tune of Rs.5,22,06 e the claimants/appellants filed n awarded by the Tribunal. -appellants contend that the amo er side. He further contends that onthly income of the deceased s that the learned Tribunal 13 and failed to include fut enses. Therefore, he prays that ould be enhanced as per latest law he respondent-Insurance Compa y been passed and the amount al has rightly been granted. the parties and perused the wh

ding r in of on 60/- ount d as has ture w. any t of

9.

A p deceased the to wrongly assesse Rs.2000/- per m settled principl Shyamvati Sha while ascertaini certificate as ded etc., should not

10.

In Shaymvati Sha Rs.11,322/- per instead of 13 as prospectus, loss loss of consortiu SETTLED LAW

11.

Ho Transport Corp down the law o are as under:- "30 and Tri ded Cou

perusal of the award indicates t otal salary was Rs.11,322/- per ed the deceased's income as Rs month, which was being contribu e of law as held by Hon'ble arma & Ors Vs. Karam Singh ng the income of the deceased, ductions towards GPF, life insur be excluded from the income. view of the judgment rendered rma (supra), this Court assess month. Further the Tribunal ha per settled law. Further, the lear of estate and funeral expenses. um. Therefore, the award require W ON COMPENSATION n'ble Supreme Court in the poration and Another [(2009) 6 on assessment of compensation

¶0Though in some cases the dedu d living expenses is calculated lok Chandra, the general pr ductions. Having a considered s urt, we are of the view that wh

that as per salary certificate of month, however, the Tribunal s.9,322/- per month after deduct uted towards G.P. Fund. It is a w e Supreme Court in the case & Ors [2010 AIR SCW 4391] t any deductions shown in the sal rance premium, repayments of lo by the Hon'ble Supreme Cour s the income of the deceased as wrongly taken the multiplier o rned Tribunal has not granted fut Further no amount was granted es interference by this Court. case of Sarla Verma Vs. De 6 Supreme Court Cases 121], l and the relevant paras of the sa uction to be made towards perso on the basis of units indicated ractice is to apply standardi several subsequent decisions of here the deceased was married,

has ting well of that lary oans t in d as of 7 ture for elhi laid ame onal d in ised

ded sho mem fam dep

¶31par bac exp mo get par evid and be con bec be d th be 50% in you exp wil *

¶42men

duction towards personal and ould be one-third (1/3rd) where mbers is 2 to 3, one-fourth (1/4 mily members is 4 to 6, and one pendent family members exceeds Where the deceased was a ba rents, the deduction follows a chelors, normally, 50% is de penses, because it is assumed th re on himself. Even otherwise, tting married in a short time, in rent(s) and siblings is likely to be dence to the contrary, the fathe d will not be considered as a de considered as a dependant. In ntrary, brothers and sisters will cause they will either be indepe dependent on the father.

¶2Thus even if the deceased is su he mother would be considered treated as the personal and liv % as the contribution to the fam e bachelor is large and dependen a case where he has a widow unger non-earning sisters or b penses may be restricted to one-t ll be taken as two-third.

*

* We therefore hold that the m ntioned in Column (4) of the t

living expenses of the deceas e the number of dependent fam th) where the number of depend e-fifth (1/5th) where the number s six. achelor and the claimants are different principle. In regard deducted as personal and liv hat a bachelor would tend to sp there is also the possibility of which event the contribution to e cut drastically. Further, subjec er is likely to have his own inco ependant and the mother alone w In the absence of evidence to l not be considered as dependa endent and earning, or married, rvived by parents and siblings, o to be a dependant, and 50% wo ving expenses of the bachelor a mily. However, where the family nt on the income of the deceased, wed mother and large number brothers, his personal and liv third and contribution to the fam *

*

* multiplier to be used should be table above (prepared by apply

sed, mily dent r of d to ving end f his ct to ome will nts, , or only ould and y of d, as r of ving mily e as

Sus ope yea for yea

12.

Ho Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sections 166, 1 aspects:-

(A) mu

(B)

(C)

(D) esta

(E) age The

samma Thomas³, Trilok Chandra erative multiplier of 18 (for the a ars), reduced by one unit for eve years, M-16 for 31 to 35 years, to 45 years, and M-13 for 46 to every five years, that is, M-11 f ars, M-7 for 61 to 65 years and M n'ble Supreme Court in the case y Sethi & Ors. [(2017) 16 SCC 63-A and 168 of the Motor Ve ) Deduction of personal an ultiplicand; ) Selection of multiplier depen ) Age of deceased on basis for ) Reasonable figures on con ate, loss of consortium and funer ) Future prospects for all cate es: with permanent job; self-emp e relevant portion of the judgmen "52. As far as the conventi it difficult to agree with the granted Rs.25,000 towards towards loss of consortium care and guidance for minor of care and minor children d to Santosh Devi, it does n conventional and traditional determined on percentage b acceptable criterion. Unlike

a and Charlie), which starts with age groups of 15 to 20 and 21 to ery five years, that is M-17 for 26 M-15 for 36 to 40 years, M-14 50 years, then reduced by two un for 51 to 55 years, M-9 for 56 to M-5 for 66 to 70 years. e of National Insurance Comp C 680] has clarified the law un ehicles Act, 1988, on the follow nd living expenses to determ nding on age of deceased; r applying multiplier; nventional heads, namely, loss ral expenses, with escalation; egories of persons and for differ ployed or fixed salary. nt is reproduced as under:- ional heads are concerned, we f e view expressed in Rajesh². It s funeral expenses, Rs 1,00,0 and Rs 1,00,000 towards loss r children. The head relating to l does not exist. Though Rajesh ref not seem to follow the same. T l heads, needless to say, cannot basis because that would not be e determination of income, the s

h an o 25 6 to for nits o 60 pany nder wing mine of rent find has s of loss fers The t be e an

heads have to be quantified reasonable foundation. Ther that price index, fall in ba many a field have to be n oblivious to the same. Ther aspect. Otherwise, there determination of the same an there will be immense variat as a consequence of which, and courts are likely to be seemly to fix reasonable sum figures on conventional hea consortium and funeral Rs.40,000 and Rs.15,000 revisiting the said heads is revisit should not be fact-cen that it would be condign quantified should be enhan three years and the enhance in a span of three years. W that will bring in consistency *

*

59.3. While determining th actual salary to the incom prospects, where the deceas below the age of 40 years, sh be 30%, if the age of the dec In case the deceased was bet addition should be 15%. Act salary less tax.

59.4. In case the deceased salary, an addition of 40% o

d. Any quantification must hav re can be no dispute over the f ank interest, escalation of rates noticed. The court cannot rem re has been a thumb rule in will be extreme difficulty nd unless the thumb rule is appli tion lacking any kind of consiste the orders passed by the tribun e unguided. Therefore, we think ms. It seems to us that reasona ads, namely, loss of estate, loss expenses should be Rs.15,0 respectively. The principle s an acceptable principle. But ntric or quantum-centric. We th that the amount that we h nced on percentage basis in ev ement should be at the rate of 1 We are disposed to hold so beca y in respect of those heads. *

*

* he income, an addition of 50% e of the deceased towards fut sed had a permanent job and w hould be made. The addition sho ceased was between 40 to 50 yea tween the age of 50 to 60 years, tual salary should be read as act was self-employed (or) on a fix of the established income should

ve a fact s in main this in ied, ncy nals k it able s of 000, of hink ave very 0% ause % of ture was ould ars. tual ixed

13.

Ho Company Limi 130] after cons settled the law r as under:-

the warrant where the decea An addition of 25% where th 40 to 50 years and 10% wh age of 50 to 60 years shou method of computation. Th income minus the tax compon

59.5. For determination of t personal and living expenses be guided by paras 30 to 3 reproduced hereinbefore.

59.6. The selection of multi Table in Sarla Verma¹ read w

59.7. The age of the decease the multiplier.

59.8. Reasonable figures on estate, loss of consortium a 15,000, Rs 40,000 and Rs amounts should be enhanced years." n'ble Supreme Court in the ca ited Vs. Nanu Ram alias Chuh sidering Sarla Verma (supra regarding consortium. Relevan "21. A Constitution Bench o with the various heads und awarded in a death case. consortium. In legal parlanc term which encompasses consortium", and "filial con

ased was below the age of 40 yea he deceased was between the age here the deceased was between uld be regarded as the necess he established income means nent. the multiplicand, the deduction s, the tribunals and the courts sh 32 of Sarla Verma⁴ which we h iplier shall be as indicated in with para 42 of that judgment. ed should be the basis for apply conventional heads, namely, loss and funeral expenses should be 15,000 respectively. The afores d at the rate of 10% in every th se of Magma General Insura hru Ram & Others [2018(18) S a) and Pranay Sethi (Supra) nt paras of the same are reprodu of this Court in Pranay Sethi² de der which compensation is to One of these heads is loss ce, "consortium" is a compendi "spousal consortium", "paren nsortium". The right to consorti

ars. e of sary for hall ave ying s of Rs said hree nce CC has uced ealt be of ious ntal

would include the company solace and affection of the family. With respect to a relations with the deceased sp

21.1. Spousal consortium pertaining to the relationshi compensation to the surviv society, cooperation, affecti conjugal relation".

21.2. Parental consortium premature death of a pa protection, affection, soc training".

21.3. Filial consortium i compensation in the case of accident leading to the death agony to the parents and fa agony for a parent is to los Children are valued for the and their role in the family u

¶22Consortium is a special about the status and worth jurisdictions world-over hav child's consortium far exc compensation awarded in th jurisdictions therefore pe compensation under loss of c The amount awarded to the of the love, affection, care a child.

¶23The Motor Vehicles Act providing relief to the victi

ny, care, help, comfort, guidan deceased, which is a loss to spouse, it would include sex spouse. is generally defined as rig ip of a husband-wife which allo ving spouse for loss of "compa on, and aid of the other in ev is granted to the child upon rent, for loss of "parental a ciety, discipline, guidance a is the right of the parents f an accidental death of a child. h of a child causes great shock a amily of the deceased. The grea se their child during their lifeti eir love, affection, companions nit. l prism reflecting changing nor h of actual relationships. Mod ve recognised that the value of ceeds the economic value of e case of the death of a child. M ermit parents to be award consortium on the death of a ch parents is a compensation for l and companionship of the decea is a beneficial legislation aimed ims or their families, in cases

nce, his xual ghts ows any, very aid, and to An and test me. ship rms dern of a Most rded hild. loss ased d at

CONCLUSION

14.

In above referred

09.01.2007 is enhanced amoun Sr. No. M Fu De ex

¶4To

genuine claims. In case wh child, or unmarried son or d be awarded loss of conso consortium. Parental consor lose their parents in motor few High Courts have awa However, there was no clari which compensation could consortium.

¶24The amount of compensa will be governed by the pri under "loss of consortium" a present case, we deem it ap the sister of the deceased, an of filial consortium. N view of the law laid down by to judgments, the present app modified accordingly. The ap nt of compensation as per the cal Heads Monthly Income uture prospects @ 30% eduction towards persona xpenditure otal Income

here a parent has lost their mi daughter, the parents are entitled ortium under the head of fi rtium is awarded to children w vehicle accidents under the Act arded compensation on this cou ity with respect to the principles d be awarded on loss of fi ation to be awarded as consorti inciples of awarding compensat as laid down in Pranay Sethi². In ppropriate to award the father a n amount of Rs 40,000 each for l the Hon'ble Supreme Court in peal is allowed. The award da ppellants-claimants are entitled lculations made here-under:- Compensation Awarded Rs.11,322/- Rs.3,396/- (30% of 11,322 ) al Rs.3,679/- [1/4 of (11322+3396 = 14718

Rs.11,039/- (14718-3679)

inor d to ilial who t. A unt. s on ilial ium tion and loss ated d to d 8]

M An Lo Fu Lo Pa Sp

To

Am Tr

En

15.

So Court in Dara S and R.Valli and Supreme Court per annum on th date of its realiz

16.

Res deposit the enha within a period disburse the enh of all the claim The claimants/a Tribunal.

17.

Dis

Multiplier nnual Dependency oss of Estate uneral Expenses oss of Consortium arental : Rs. 48,000/- x5 pousal : Rs. 48,000/-x1 otal Compensation mount Awarded by the ribunal nhanced amount far as the interest part is conce Singh @ Dhara Banjara Vs. Shy d Others VS. Tamil Nandu State t Cases 107, the appellants-claim he enhanced amount from the da zation. spondent No.2 – United India anced amount of compensation a d of two months from today. T hanced amount of compensation mants/appellants as per ratio settl appellants are directed to furnish sposed off accordingly.

Rs.17,22,084/-(11039 x 12 x 1

Rs.18,000/- Rs.18,000/- Rs.2,88,000/- Rs.20,46,084/- Rs.5,22,060/- Rs.15,24,024/- erned, as held by Hon'ble Supre yam Singh Varma 2019 ACJ 31 e Transport Corporation (2022 mants are granted the interest @ ate of filing of claim petition, till Insurance Company is directed along with interest with the Tribu The Tribunal is further directed n along with interest in the accou led in the award dated 09.01.20 h their bank account details to

13) eme 2) 5 9% d to unal d to unts

007.

18.

Pen

September 19, tripti

nding applications, if any, also st

(SUDE

2024 Whether speaking/non-speak

tand disposed of. EPTI SHARMA) JUDGE king : Speaking : Yes