Kanta and Ors v. Maha Singh and Ors

IN T

Kanta and Other Maha Singh and

CORAM : HON

Present: Mr

Mr

Mr

Mr

Mr

Mr

SUDEEPTI SH

1.

The against the awar Tribunal, Karna Vehicles Act, 1 on account of de

2.

As quantum of com the facts of the c

THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJ AT CHANDIGA -.-

FA Da rs

VERSUS d Others

N'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUDE r. Maneet Kaushik, Advocate for r. Ashit Malik, Advocate for the r. Harish Nain, AAG, Haryana, fo r. Suman Jain, Advocate for resp r. Neeraj Khanna, Advocate for r. R.N.Singal, Advocate for respo -.- HARMA, J. (Oral)

e present appeal has been pre rd dated 29.01.2007 passed by t al (for short, 'the Tribunal') un 988, whereby, the claimants/app eath of Jai Pal. sole issue for determination in mpensation awarded by the learn case is not reproduced and is skip

JAB AND HARYANA ARH AO-3025-2007 (O&M) ate of Decision : 16.12.2024

....Appellants

....Respondents EEPTI SHARMA r appellants. for respondent No.2. ondent– National Insurance Co. ondent – Oriental Insurance Co. ferred by the claimants/appella the learned Motor Accident Clai nder Section 166/140 of the Mo pellants were granted Rs.3,23,90 n the present appeal is confined ned Tribunal, a detailed narration pped herein for the sake of brevi

ants ims otor 00/- d to n of

SUBMISSIONS

3.

Lea petition was ori received by him his injuries and (appellant No.1 (appellant Nos. Tribunal is on towards future consortium and present appeal b as per the latest

4.

Per the learned Trib of compensation

5.

I h record of this ca

6.

A assessed the mo record reveals t further revealed and the amount lower side. The

¶17Moreover,

S OF LEARNED COUNSELS arned counsel for the claimants-iginally filed by Jai Pal for co m, but during the pendency of th d the claim petition was furthe ), his minor daughters (appell 4 and 5). He further states tha the lower side. He further cont prospects, loss of estate and d funeral expenses is on lower be allowed and the awarded am law. r contra, learned for the respond bunal vide award dated 29.01.20 n. Therefore, he prays for dismis have heard learned counsel for ase. perusal of record shows that onthly income of the deceased a hat the deceased was 28 years o d that no amount was granted tow t granted for loss of consortium Tribunal has also erred in apply the Tribunal has also erred in d

S FOR THE PARTIES -appellants contends that the cla mpensation on account of injur he claim petition, he succumbed er continued by his widow Ka ant Nos.2 and 3) and his pare at amount assessed by the learn tends that no amount was gran d the amount granted for loss side. Therefore, he prays that mount of compensation be enhan dent-Insurance Company argue t 007 has rightly assessed the amo ssal of the present appeal. the parties and perused the wh the learned Tribunal has righ s Rs.2400/-. Further perusal of of age at time of the accident. I wards future prospects, loss of est m and funeral expenses is also ying the multiplier of 15 instead deducting 1/3rd of the income of

aim ries d to anta ents ned nted of nced that ount hole htly It is tate on

deceased toward requires indulge

7.

A p death had suffer functioning of h treatment from shows that due succumbed to th has dealt with th Vs. Mohit Mitta under:- "10 view Ma oth " con imp Trip

¶2pet dec and

ds his personal expenditure, inst ence of this Court. perusal of the record clearly sh red defused axonal injuries there his body. His injury had resulte different hospitals. The Disa to the injuries he had become p he injuries because he could not he same issue in FAO-5040-200 al and others Decided on 29.11.2

¶0The claimants are als w of judgment of Hon'ble the A anager, Oriental Insurance Co. hers, 2023 ACJ 864 wherein it ha Having heard learned co nsiderable length, we do not fin pugned judgment dated 7.1.20 ipura. The question of law sough titioner does not arise for cons ceased son of the respondent(s) m d he remained hospitalised at

tead of 1/4th. Therefore, the aw hows that the deceased before eby affecting the sensory and mo ed into septicemia. He underg ability Certificate Ex.P-142 clea ermanently disabled and ultimat fully recover from that. This Co 06 titled as Hans Raj and anot 2024 and the same is reproduced o entitled for pain and suffering Apex Court in a case of Divisio . Ltd vs. Maran Chandra Das a as been held as under:- ounsel for the petitioner at nd any ground to interfere with 21 passed by the High Court ht to be raised on behalf of sideration for the reason that met with an accident on 20.10.20 Kolkata where multiple surger

ward his otor one arly tely ourt ther d as g in onal and t a t of

wer suc

¶3par alm The dur

8.

In compensation un SETTLED LAW

9.

Ho Transport Corp down the law o are as under:- "30 per ind stan dec was dep

re performed on him. Howe ccumbed to injuries on 13.9.2016 In the peculiar facts and cir rents witnessed the pain, agon most one year, the compensation e head of pain and suffering, can e parents themselves also suffer ring this entire period" view of the above, the clai nder the Head - Pain and Sufferi W ON COMPENSATION n'ble Supreme Court in the poration and Another [(2009) 6 on assessment of compensation

¶0Though in some cases the rsonal and living expenses is dicated in Trilok Chandra, th ndardised deductions. Having cisions of this Court, we are of s married, the deduction toward e deceased, should be one-thir pendent family members is 2 t

ever, he could not survive a

¶6rcumstances of this case, where ny and suffering of their son awarded by the High Court, un not be said to be without any ba red unbearable pain every mom imants/appellants are entitled ings, suffered by the deceased. case of Sarla Verma Vs. De 6 Supreme Court Cases 121], l and the relevant paras of the sa e deduction to be made towa calculated on the basis of un he general practice is to ap a considered several subsequ f the view that where the decea ds personal and living expenses rd (1/3rd) where the number to 3, one-fourth (1/4th) where

and for nder asis. ment for elhi laid ame ards nits pply uent ased s of

num whe

¶31par bac exp mo get par to e and be con bec be only wou and of t as you

mber of dependent family memb ere the number of dependent fam Where the deceased was a ba rents, the deduction follows a chelors, normally, 50% is d 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 b evidence to the contrary, the fath d will not be considered as a de considered as a dependant. I ntrary, brothers and sisters will cause they will either be indepe dependent on the father.

¶2Thus even if the deceased is ly d the mother would be consid uld be treated as the personal a d 50% as the contribution to the the bachelor is large and depend in a case where he has a wido unger non-earning sisters or b

bers is 4 to 6, and one-fifth (1/5 mily members exceeds 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 be cut drastically. Further, subj her 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, survived by parents and siblin dered to be a dependant, and 5 and living expenses of the bache e family. However, where the fam dent on the income of the deceas owed mother and large number brothers, his personal and liv

5th) d to ving end f his ject ome will nts, , or ngs, 50% elor mily sed, r of

exp wil *

¶42men Sus an 25 y to 3 for uni to 6

10.

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

(A) mu

(B)

(C)

(D) esta

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 samma Thomas³, Trilok Chandr operative multiplier of 18 (for th years), reduced by one unit for e 30 years, M-16 for 31 to 35 yea 41 to 45 years, and M-13 for 4 its for every five years, that is, M 60 years, M-7 for 61 to 65 years 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

third and contribution to the fam *

*

* multiplier to be used should be table above (prepared by apply ra and Charlie), which starts w he age groups of 15 to 20 and 21 every five years, that is M-17 for ars, M-15 for 36 to 40 years, M 46 to 50 years, then reduced by M-11 for 51 to 55 years, M-9 for and 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;

mily e as ying with 1 to r 26 M-14 two r 56 pany nder wing mine

(E) age The

) 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 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

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 d. Any quantification must hav re can be no dispute over the f nk interest, escalation of rates noticed. The court cannot rem re has been a thumb rule in t 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

rent find has s of loss fers The t be e an said ve a fact s in main this in ied, ncy nals k it

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%. actual salary less tax.

59.4. In case the deceased salary, an addition of 40% o the warrant where the decea An addition of 25% where th 40 to 50 years and 10% wh

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, Actual salary should be read was self-employed (or) on a fix of the established income should ased was below the age of 40 yea he deceased was between the age here the deceased was between

s of 000, of hink ave very 0% ause % of ture was ould ars. d as ixed d be ars.

11.

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

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 1 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.

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 Verma 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

sary for hall ave ying s of Rs said hree nce CC has uced ealt be

consortium. In legal parlanc term which encompasses consortium", and "filial con 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

ce, "consortium" is a compendi "spousal consortium", "paren nsortium". The right to consorti y, 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 ion, 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 unit.

ious ntal ium nce, his xual ghts ows any, very aid, and to An and test me.

¶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 vict genuine claims. In case wh child, or unmarried son or d be awarded loss of conso consortium. Parental conso 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

l prism reflecting changing nor h of actual relationships. Mod ve recognised that the value o 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 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

rms dern of a Most ded hild. loss ased d at s of inor d to filial who t. A unt. s on ilial ium

CONCLUSION

12.

In above referred

29.01.2007 is m compensation as Sr. No. M F D ex T M A L F M P L F S P

T

A

E

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. The appellants-claim s per the calculations made here-Heads Monthly Income uture prospects @40% Deduction towards personal xpenditure (1/4rd) Total Income Multiplier Annual Dependency Loss of Estate uneral Expenses Medical Expenses ain and Suffering Loss of Consortium ilial : Rs.48,000/- x 2 pousal : Rs.48,000/- x 1 arental : Rs.48,000/- x 2 Total Compensation Amount awarded by Tribunal Enhanced Amount

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 mants are entitled to the enchan -under:- Compensation Awarded Rs.2400/- Rs.960/- (40% of 2400) Rs.840/- [1/4 of 3360] Rs.2520/- (3360-840) Rs.5,14,080/-(2520x12x17 Rs.18,000/- Rs.18,000/- Rs.28,835/- Rs.1,00,000/- Rs.2,40,000/- Rs.9,18,915/- Rs.3,23,835/- Rs.5,95,080/- (9,18,915– 3,23,835)

and loss ated nced d 7)

13.

So Court in Dara S and R.Valli and Supreme Cour 9% per annum o the date of its re

14.

In v is directed to d within a period The Tribunal is interest in the Tribunal in aw furnish their ban

15.

In

18.07.2024 pass disburse the cu R.N.Singal, Adv copy of this judg

16.

Dis

17.

Pen

December 16, 2 tripti

Whethe

Whethe

far as the interest part is conce Singh @ Dhara Banjara Vs. Shy d Others VS. Tamil Nadu State rt Cases 107, the appellants-cla on the enhanced amount from th ealization. view of the above, respondent N deposit the enhanced amount o of two months from the date o further directed to disburse the a account of claimants/appellant ward dated 29.01.2007. The cla nk account details to the Tribuna view of the order passed in sed by this Court the insurance urrent scheduled fee to Mr. vocate within a period of twent gment. sposed of accordingly. nding applications, if any, also st

er speaking/non-speaking : Speak er reportable

: Yes/N

erned, as held by Hon'ble Supre yam Singh Varma 2019 ACJ 31 e Transport Corporation (2022 aimants are granted the interest he date of filing of claim petition No.3-National Insurance Compa of compensation with the Tribu of receipt of copy of this judgme amount of compensation along w ts as per the ratio settled by aimants/appellants are directed al. n FAO No.1682 of 2007 da e companies are hereby directed Suman Jain, Advocate and M ty days from the date of receipt tand disposed of. (SUDEEPTI SHARMA)

JUDGE king

eme 2) 5 t @ n till any unal ent. with d to ated d to Mr.