Kumari Priti and Ors v. Mahender and Ors

¶1to the app FACTS N

¶2(deceased Hazipur a which wa jeep reach Rajiv Cho 4665 cam being driv Kumar w received h Kumar w his last. T for enhanc pellants. NOT IN DISPUTE Brief facts of the case are that o d) along with one Naresh Ku at about 4.30 a.m. while riding as going from Rajiv Chowk, Gu hed near Devi Lal Stadium at a owk, Gurgaon a car Wagon-R be me from the side of Sohna in a v ven by respondent No.1 and h was travelling. Due to the impac head injury and driver of the jeep as shifted to the General Hospi The matter was reported to the P cement of compensation granted on 09.12.2003, Devinder Kumar umar was going to his village g into jeep No. HR-35-A-5877 urgaon to Sohna. When the said distance of one kilometer from earing registration No.HR-26-N-very rash and negligent manner hit the jeep in which Devinder ct of that jeep Devinder Kumar p also received injury. Devinder tal, Gurgaon where he breathed Police by Naresh Kumar and FIR d r e d m - r r r r d R

No.714 d registered

¶3their joint regarding action to well. Th license an responden company objections driving lic the accide No.4, wh negligentl other alle claim pet statement they have driving of

¶4following dated 09.12.2003 under Sections d to this effect. Upon notice of the claim petitio t statement in which certain pre the facts that the petitioners ha file the present petition and th he respondent No.1 was holdin nd the compensation if any awa nt No.3-Insurance Company. has filed its separate written st s that respondent No.1 was no cense; the alleged offending veh ent took place due to rash and ho was driving the vehicle ly. On merits, the income; pro egations in toto were denied. T tition. The respondents No.4 t denying the accident with vehi e admitted that the accident was c f car bearing registration No. HR From the pleadings of the pa g issues:-

¶1Whether the accident negligent driving of respondent no.1 or du s 279, 337 and 304-A IPC was on, respondents No.1 and 2 filed eliminary objections were raised ave no locus standi and cause of he same is not maintainable as g a valid and effective driving arded is liable to be paid by the Respondent No.3-Insurance tatement and taking preliminary ot holding a valid and effective hicle was not the actually at fault negligent driving of respondent No.HR-35-A-5877 rashly and ofession of the deceased and all They prayed for dismissal of the and 5 also filed their written icle No. HR-35-A-5877. Rather caused due to rash and negligent R-26-N-4665. arties, the Tribunal framed the t took place due to rash and f car No. HR-26-N-4665 by ue to rash and negligent driving s d d f s g e e y e t t d l e n r t e d y g

¶5evidence tune of 4 claimants compensa SUBMIS

¶6the comp further co deceased amount to should be instead of not awar prospects for loss of prayed th compensa of Jeep No. HR-35-A 4665 by respondents N

¶2Whether the petitioner If so how much and fro

¶3Whether respondents valid driving license at

¶4Relief.

After taking into consider on record, the learned Tribuna 4,88,128/- along with interest @ /appellants filed the present ation awarded by the learned Trib SIONS OF LEARNED COUN The learned counsel for the cla ensation granted by the learned ontends that the Tribunal has w as 4268/- p.m. He further con owards his personal expenditur e 1/4th. The Tribunal erred in f multiplier of 16 as per settled rded any amount on account . He further contends that the a f estate and funeral expenses is a hat the present appeal be ation awarded to the appellants/c A-5877 and Car No.HR-26-N-No.4 and 1 respectively ? OPP rs are entitled to compensation. om whom? OPP. No.1 and 4 were not holding a t the time of accident ? OPR. ration the pleadings and the al awarded compensation to the @ 7.5% per annum. Hence, the appeal for enhancement of bunal. NSELS FOR THE PARTIES aimants-appellants contends that d Tribunal is on lower side. He wrongly taken the income of the ntends that the deduction of 1/3rd re is at higher side whereas it n applying the multiplier of 14 law. The learned Tribunal has of consortium and for future amount of compensation granted also on lower side. Therefore he allowed and the amount of claimants shall be enhanced. - . a e e e f t e e d t s e d e f

¶8whole rec

¶9of age at of PW-Administr Devender allowance award sho deceased-considera assess the taxes. SETTLE

¶10Transpor I have heard learned counsel cord of this case. A perusal of the award indicate the time of accident and as per i.e. Ashok Chugh, Su ration, M/s. Nuchem Weir L r Kumar was receiving a salary es of approximately 1250-1300 ows that the Tribunal has erred -Devender Kumar as 4268/ ation the statement of PW-1 an e monthly income of the decease ED LAW ON COMPENSATIO Hon'ble Supreme Court in the rt Corporation and Another [(2 for the parties and perused the s that the deceased was 31 years salary certificate and statement uperintendent Personnel and Limited, Faridabad, deceased-of 6808/- per month plus field 0 per month. A perusal of the d in taking monthly income of /- pm however, taking into nd salary certificate this court ed as 7400/- after deducting the ON case of Sarla Verma Vs. Delhi 2009) 6 Supreme Court Cases e s t d - d e f o t e i s

121], laid paras of th d down the law on assessment of he same are as under:- "30. Though in some case towards personal and living basis of units indicated in practice is to apply stand considered several subseque are of the view that where deduction towards persona deceased, should be one-thir dependent family members where the number of depen and one-fifth (1/5th) where t members exceeds six.

¶31Where the deceased was are the parents, the deductio In regard to bachelors, n personal and living expense bachelor would tend to sp otherwise, there is also the p in a short time, in which parent(s) and siblings is like subject to evidence to the c have his own income and dependant and the mother dependant. In the absence brothers and sisters will no because they will either be married, or be dependent on

¶32Thus even if the deceas siblings, only d the mother dependant, and 50% would f compensation and the relevant es the deduction to be made g expenses is calculated on the n Trilok Chandra, the general dardised deductions. Having a ent decisions of this Court, we the deceased was married, the al and living expenses of the rd (1/3rd) where the number of is 2 to 3, one-fourth (1/4th) dent family members is 4 to 6, the number of dependent family s a bachelor and the claimants on follows a different principle. normally, 50% is deducted as es, because it is assumed that a spend more on himself. Even possibility of his getting married event the contribution to the ly to be cut drastically. Further, contrary, the father is likely to will not be considered as a alone will be considered as a of evidence to the contrary, ot be considered as dependants, e independent and earning, or the father. sed is survived by parents and r would be considered to be a be treated as the personal and t e e l a e e e f ) , y s . s a n d e

o a a , , r d a d

¶11Company clarified Vehicles A living expenses of the bachel to the family. However, whe large and dependent on the case where he has a widowe younger non-earning sisters living expenses may be contribution to the family wil *

*

*

¶42We therefore hold that t be as mentioned in Column ( by applying Susamma Th Charlie), which starts with a the age groups of 15 to 20 a one unit for every five years, M-16 for 31 to 35 years, M-41 to 45 years, and M-13 for two units for every five yea years, M-9 for 56 to 60 years 5 for 66 to 70 years. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the y Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi & O the law under Sections 166, Act, 1988, on the following aspe

(A) Deduction of person determine multiplicand;

(B) Selection of multiplier

(C) Age of deceased on ba

(D) Reasonable figures on loss of estate, loss of consort escalation; lor and 50% as the contribution ere the family of the bachelor is income of the deceased, as in a ed mother and large number of s or brothers, his personal and restricted to one-third and ll be taken as two-third.

*

* the multiplier to be used should

(4) of the table above (prepared homas³, Trilok Chandra and an operative multiplier of 18 (for and 21 to 25 years), reduced by that is M-17 for 26 to 30 years, -15 for 36 to 40 years, M-14 for r 46 to 50 years, then reduced by ars, that is, M-11 for 51 to 55 s, M-7 for 61 to 65 years and M-e case of National Insurance Ors. [(2017) 16 SCC 680] has 163-A and 168 of the Motor ects:- nal and living expenses to r depending on age of deceased; asis for applying multiplier; n conventional heads, namely, tium and funeral expenses, with n s a f d d d d d r y

r y - e s r o , h

(E) Future prospects for a different ages: with permane salary. The relevant portion o under:- "52. As far as th concerned, we find it expressed in Rajesh towards funeral expen consortium and Rs 1,0 guidance for minor ch of care and minor ch Rajesh refers to Sant follow the same. The heads, needless to s percentage basis bec acceptable criterion. U the said heads ha quantification must h There can be no dispu fall in bank interest, field have to be noti oblivious to the same. this aspect. Otherwise, in determination of th rule is applied, ther lacking any kind of co which, the orders pass are likely to be ung seemly to fix reasona reasonable figures on loss of estate, loss of c should be Rs.15,00 all categories of persons and for ent job; self-employed or fixed of the judgment is reproduced as he conventional heads are difficult to agree with the view h². It has granted Rs.25,000 nses, Rs 1,00,000 towards loss of 00,000 towards loss of care and ildren. The head relating to loss hildren does not exist. Though tosh Devi, it does not seem to e conventional and traditional say, cannot be determined on cause that would not be an Unlike determination of income, ave to be quantified. Any have a reasonable foundation. ute over the fact that price index, escalation of rates in many a iced. The court cannot remain There has been a thumb rule in , there will be extreme difficulty he same and unless the thumb re will be immense variation onsistency as a consequence of sed by the tribunals and courts guided. Therefore, we think it able sums. It seems to us that n conventional heads, namely, consortium and funeral expenses 0, Rs.40,000 and Rs.15,000 r d s e w f d s h o l n n

y

a n n y b n f s t t

s

respectively. The pr heads is an accepta should not be fact-ce think that it would be c have quantified shoul basis in every three should be at the rate o We are disposed to ho consistency in respect *

*

59.3. While determin 50% of actual salary towards future prospe permanent job and w should be made. The age of the deceased w case the deceased wa years, the addition sh should be read as actu

59.4. In case the dece a fixed salary, an add income should be the w below the age of 40 ye the deceased was betw and 10% where the de 50 to 60 years should method of computat means the income min

59.5. For determina deduction for person tribunals and the cour to 32 of Sarla Verm hereinbefore. rinciple of revisiting the said able principle. But the revisit entric or quantum-centric. We condign that the amount that we ld be enhanced on percentage e years and the enhancement of 10% in a span of three years. old so because that will bring in of those heads. *

*

* ning the income, an addition of to the income of the deceased ects, where the deceased had a was below the age of 40 years, addition should be 30%, if the was between 40 to 50 years. In as between the age of 50 to 60 hould be 15%. Actual salary ual salary less tax. eased was self-employed (or) on dition of 40% of the established warrant where the deceased was ears. An addition of 25% where ween the age of 40 to 50 years eceased was between the age of d be regarded as the necessary tion. The established income us the tax component. tion of the multiplicand, the nal and living expenses, the rts shall be guided by paras 30 ma which we have reproduced d t e e e t

n f d a

e n y n d s e s f y e e e d

¶12Insuranc Others [2 Pranay Relevant p

59.6. The selection of in the Table in Sarla V judgment.

59.7. The age of the d applying the multiplier

59.8. Reasonable fig namely, loss of estate, expenses should be R 15,000 respectively. T enhanced at the rate of Hon'ble Supreme Court in t e Company Limited Vs. Nan 2018(18) SCC 130] after conside Sethi (Supra) has settled th paras of the same are reproduced "21. A Constitution B Sethi² dealt with the compensation is to be of these heads is loss o "consortium" is a encompasses "spous consortium", and "fil consortium would inc comfort, guidance, s deceased, which is a lo a spouse, it would in deceased spouse.

21.1. Spousal consor rights pertaining to the f multiplier shall be as indicated Verma¹ read with para 42 of that deceased should be the basis for r. gures on conventional heads, loss of consortium and funeral Rs 15,000, Rs 40,000 and Rs The aforesaid amounts should be f 10% in every three years." the case of Magma General u Ram alias Chuhru Ram & ering Sarla Verma (supra) and he law regarding consortium. d as under:- Bench of this Court in Pranay e various heads under which e awarded in a death case. One of consortium. In legal parlance, compendious term which sal consortium", "parental lial consortium". The right to clude the company, care, help, solace and affection of the oss to his family. With respect to clude sexual relations with the rtium is generally defined as e relationship of a husband-wife d t r

l s e l & d . y h e , h l o

e o e s e

which allows compen for loss of "company, and aid of the other in

21.2. Parental conso upon the premature "parental aid, protecti guidance and training

21.3. Filial consortium compensation in the c child. An accident le causes great shock a family of the deceas parent is to lose the Children are value companionship and the

¶22Consortium is a sp norms about the s relationships. Modern recognised that the va exceeds the economi awarded in the case jurisdictions therefore compensation under l of a child. The amou compensation for loss companionship of the d

¶23The Motor Vehicle aimed at providing families, in cases of g nsation to the surviving spouse society, cooperation, affection, every conjugal relation". ortium is granted to the child death of a parent, for loss of ion, affection, society, discipline, ". m is the right of the parents to case of an accidental death of a eading to the death of a child and agony to the parents and ed. The greatest agony for a eir child during their lifetime. d for their love, affection, eir role in the family unit. pecial prism reflecting changing status and worth of actual n jurisdictions world-over have alue of a child's consortium far ic value of the compensation of the death of a child. Most e permit parents to be awarded loss of consortium on the death nt awarded to the parents is a of the love, affection, care and deceased child. es Act is a beneficial legislation relief to the victims or their genuine claims. In case where a e

d f

o a d d a .

g l e r n t d h a d n r a

CONCLU

¶13the above dated 27 Gurgaon to compen Sr. No.

¶1Mon

¶2Futu

¶3Dedu expe

¶4Tota parent has lost their m daughter, the parents of consortium under Parental consortium is their parents in motor A few High Courts h this count. However, th to the principles on awarded on loss of fili

¶24The amount of co consortium will be g awarding compensatio laid down in Pranay deem it appropriate to of the deceased, an am of filial consortium. USION In view of the law laid down by e referred to judgments, the prese .02.2007 passed by the Moto is modified accordingly. The a nsation as per the calculations m Heads nthly Income ure prospects @50% uction towards personal enditure (1/4th) al Income minor child, or unmarried son or are entitled to be awarded loss the head of filial consortium. is awarded to children who lose vehicle accidents under the Act. have awarded compensation on here was no clarity with respect which compensation could be al consortium. ompensation to be awarded as governed by the principles of on under "loss of consortium" as Sethi². In the present case, we o award the father and the sister mount of Rs 40,000 each for loss y the Hon'ble Supreme Court in ent appeal is allowed. The award or Accident Claims Tribunal, appellants-claimants are entitled made here-under:- Compensation Awarded (In Rs.) 7400 3700 7400+3700x1/4 = 2775 11100-2775=8325 r s . e . n t e s f s e r s n d , d

¶5Mult

¶6Annu

¶7Loss

¶8Fune

¶9Loss Paren Filia

Tota

Alre

Enha

¶10Supreme Varma 20 Transpor appellant-enhanced its realiza amount o period of judgment compensa claimants the Tribun tiplier (16) ual Dependency s of Estate eral Expenses s of Consortium ntal : Rs.48000/- x 3 al : Rs.48000/- x 2 al Compensation eady Awarded by the Tribunal anced Compensation So far as the interest part is c Court in Dara Singh @ Dha 019 ACJ 3176 and R.Valli and rt Corporation (2022) 5 Sup -claimant is granted the inter amount from the date of filing ation. The Insurance Company is di of compensation along with inte f two months from the date of r . The Tribunal is further direc ation along with interest as per it /appellants are directed to furnis nal. 8325 x 16 (8325x 16x 12) =1598400 18000 18000 240000 Rs.18,74,400/- 4,88,128/- 13,86,272/- concerned, as held by Hon'ble ara Banjara Vs. Shyam Singh Others VS. Tamil Nandu State preme Court Cases 107, the rest @9% per annum on the of claim petition till the date of rected to deposit the enhanced erest with the Tribunal within a receipt of certified copy of this cted to disburse the amount of ts award dated 27.02.2007. The sh their bank accounts details to e h e e e f d a s f e o

14.

¶15Disposed of accordingly. Pending application(s), if any, a