Dev Singh and Anr v. Gurcharan Singh and Ors

SUBMIS

¶3the amou

SIONS OF LEARNED COUN The learned counsel for the cla unt awarded by the learned Trib NSELS FOR THE PARTIES aimants-appellants contends that bunal is on the lower side. He

t e

further co income o assessing in the cla earning wrongly t further co funeral e compensa prospects the comp law.

4.

¶5whole rec erred in a perusal of amount of the record ontends that the learned Tribun of the deceased-Baljeet Singh a compensation. He further subm aim petition that the deceased 5,000/- per month. He further taken the multiplier of 8 instead ontends that the amount award expenses was on lower side ation was granted towards lo . Therefore, he prayed that the pensation awarded by the Tribu I have heard learned counsel cord of this case. A perusal of the award indicate assessing the monthly income of f the record shows that the decea f 5,000/- however, no income p d. nal has erred in taking monthly as 2,000/- for the purpose of mitted that it is specifically stated d was an agriculturist and was contends that the Tribunal has of 18 as per the settled law. He ded towards loss of estate and . Moreover, no amount of oss of consortium and future e present appeal be allowed and unal be enhanced as per settled for the parties and perused the es that the learned Tribunal has f deceased as 2,000/-. Further ased was stated to be earning an proof of the same was proved on y f d s s e d f e d d e s r n n

deceased report Ex multiplier awarded t and no a prospects SETTLE

¶9Shyam Ki A perusal of the record furth was 25 years at the time of acc xhibit P-4. Therefore, the Tribu r of 8 instead of 18 as per the set towards loss of estate and funer amount was awarded towards . ED LAW ON COMPENSATIO Hon'ble Apex Court in Kurva Kishore Murmu, [2022 (1) SCC 3 "12. In the judgmen Ors.1, this Court ha Government was besto her shows that the age of the cident according to post-mortem unal has erred in applying the ttled law. Moreover, the amount al expenses is on the lower side loss of consortium and future ON an Ansari Alias Kurvan Ali vs 317] held as under :- nt in the case of Puttamma & as observed that the Central owed with the duties to amend e m e t e e s & l d

¶10Transpor 121], laid paras of th Schedule-II in view of Vehicles Act 1988, but same, specific direction Government to make Schedule-II keeping in In the said judgment, t directions were issued fixing a sum of Rs.1,00 towards compensation f to the age of 5 (fiv Rs.1,50,000/- (Rupees o the non-earning person old. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the rt Corporation and Another [(2 d down the law on assessment of he same are as under:- "30. Though in some cases the personal and living expenses is indicated in Trilok Chandra, t standardised deductions. Ha subsequent decisions of this C where the deceased was ma personal and living expenses o third (1/3rd) where the number 2 to 3, one-fourth (1/4th) wh family members is 4 to 6, an number of dependent family me

¶31Where the deceased was a the parents, the deduction fo regard to bachelors, normally, and living expenses, because Section 163-A(3) of the Motor it failed to do so. In view of the ns were issued to the Central e appropriate amendments to mind the present cost of living. ill such amendments are made, for award of compensation by 0,000/- (Rupees one lakh only) for the non-earning children up ve) years old and a sum of one lakh fifty thousand only) for ns of more than 5 (five) years case of Sarla Verma Vs. Delhi 2009) 6 Supreme Court Cases f compensation and the relevant e deduction to be made towards s calculated on the basis of units the general practice is to apply aving a considered several Court, we are of the view that arried, the deduction towards of the deceased, should be one-of dependent family members is here the number of dependent nd one-fifth (1/5th) where the mbers exceeds six. bachelor and the claimants are llows a different principle. In y, 50% is deducted as personal it is assumed that a bachelor r e l o . , y ) p f r s i s t s s y l t s - s t e e n l r

¶11Company would tend to spend more on h also the possibility of his getti which event the contribution t likely to be cut drastically. Fur contrary, the father is likely to not be considered as a dependa considered as a dependant. In contrary, brothers and sister dependants, because they wi earning, or married, or be depe

¶32Thus even if the decease siblings, only d the mother dependant, and 50% would b living expenses of the bachelor the family. However, where the and dependent on the income where he has a widowed mothe non-earning sisters or broth expenses may be restricted to o family will be taken as two-third * *

*

¶42We therefore hold that the as mentioned in Column (4) of applying Susamma Thomas³, which starts with an operative groups of 15 to 20 and 21 to 25 every five years, that is M-17 fo 35 years, M-15 for 36 to 40 yea M-13 for 46 to 50 years, then five years, that is, M-11 for 51 years, M-7 for 61 to 65 years an Hon'ble Supreme Court in the y Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi & O himself. Even otherwise, there is ing married in a short time, in to the parent(s) and siblings is rther, subject to evidence to the o have his own income and will ant and the mother alone will be the absence of evidence to the rs will not be considered as ill either be independent and endent on the father. ed is survived by parents and would be considered to be a be treated as the personal and and 50% as the contribution to e family of the bachelor is large of the deceased, as in a case er and large number of younger hers, his personal and living one-third and contribution to the d. *

* multiplier to be used should be of the table above (prepared by Trilok Chandra and Charlie), e multiplier of 18 (for the age 5 years), reduced by one unit for or 26 to 30 years, M-16 for 31 to ars, M-14 for 41 to 45 years, and reduced by two units for every 1 to 55 years, M-9 for 56 to 60 nd M-5 for 66 to 70 years. e case of National Insurance Ors. [(2017) 16 SCC 680] has s n s e l e e s d d a d o e e r g e e y , e r o d y e s

clarified Vehicles A 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 consorti escalation;

(E) Future prospects for a different ages: with permanen salary. The relevant portion of the judg "52. As far as the convent find it difficult to agree with th has granted Rs.25,000 towards towards loss of consortium an care and guidance for minor loss of care and minor children refers to Santosh Devi, it does n conventional and traditional he determined on percentage basi acceptable criterion. Unlike de heads have to be quantified. A reasonable foundation. There c that price index, fall in bank many a field have to be noti oblivious to the same. There aspect. Otherwise, there w determination of the same and u there will be immense variation as a consequence of which, the 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, ium and funeral expenses, with all categories of persons and for nt job; self-employed or fixed gment is reproduced as under:- tional heads are concerned, we he view expressed in Rajesh². It s funeral expenses, Rs 1,00,000 nd Rs 1,00,000 towards loss of children. The head relating to n does not exist. Though Rajesh not seem to follow the same. The eads, needless to say, cannot be is because that would not be an etermination of income, the said Any quantification must have a can be no dispute over the fact interest, escalation of rates in iced. The court cannot remain has been a thumb rule in this will be extreme difficulty in unless the thumb rule is applied, n lacking any kind of consistency e orders passed by the tribunals r o , h r d e t f o h e e n d a t n n s n

y s

and courts are likely to be un seemly to fix reasonable sums. figures on conventional heads, consortium and funeral exp Rs.40,000 and Rs.15,000 res revisiting the said heads is an revisit should not be fact-centri that it would be condign th quantified should be enhanced three years and the enhanceme in a span of three years. We a that will bring in consistency in * *

*

59.3. While determining the i actual salary to the income o prospects, where the deceased below the age of 40 years, s should be 30%, if the age of the years. In case the deceased wa years, the addition should be read as actual salary less tax.

59.4. In case the deceased was salary, an addition of 40% of th the warrant where the deceased An addition of 25% where the d 40 to 50 years and 10% where age of 50 to 60 years should method of computation. The income minus the tax componen

59.5. For determination of the personal and living expenses, th be guided by paras 30 to 32 o reproduced hereinbefore. nguided. Therefore, we think it It seems to us that reasonable , namely, loss of estate, loss of penses should be Rs.15,000, spectively. The principle of n acceptable principle. But the ic or quantum-centric. We think hat the amount that we have d on percentage basis in every ent should be at the rate of 10% are disposed to hold so because respect of those heads. *

* income, an addition of 50% of of the deceased towards future d had a permanent job and was should be made. The addition e deceased was between 40 to 50 as between the age of 50 to 60 15%. Actual salary should be s self-employed (or) on a fixed he established income should be d was below the age of 40 years. deceased was between the age of e the deceased was between the d be regarded as the necessary established income means the nt. multiplicand, the deduction for he tribunals and the courts shall of Sarla Verma which we have t e f

f e k e y % e f e s n e d e

f e y e r l e

¶12Insurance Others [2 Pranay S paras of th

59.6. The selection of multipli Table in Sarla Verma¹ read with

59.7. The age of the deceased s the multiplier.

59.8. Reasonable figures on co of estate, loss of consortium and 15,000, Rs 40,000 and Rs 15,0 amounts should be enhanced a years." Hon'ble Supreme Court in t e Company Limited Vs. Nanu 2018(18) SCC 130] after conside Sethi (Supra) has settled the law he same are reproduced as under "21. A Constitution Bench of th with the various heads under awarded in a death case. O consortium. In legal parlance, term which encompasses "sp consortium", and "filial consor would include the company, solace and affection of the de family. With respect to a sp relations with the deceased spou

21.1. Spousal consortium is pertaining to the relationship o compensation to the surviving society, cooperation, affection, conjugal relation".

21.2. Parental consortium is premature death of a paren ier shall be as indicated in the h para 42 of that judgment. should be the basis for applying onventional heads, namely, loss d funeral expenses should be Rs 000 respectively. The aforesaid t the rate of 10% in every three the case of Magma General u Ram alias Chuhru Ram & ering Sarla Verma (supra) and regarding consortium. Relevant r:- his Court in Pranay Sethi² dealt r which compensation is to be One of these heads is loss of "consortium" is a compendious pousal consortium", "parental rtium". The right to consortium care, help, comfort, guidance, eceased, which is a loss to his ouse, it would include sexual use. s generally defined as rights of a husband-wife which allows g spouse for loss of "company, , and aid of the other in every granted to the child upon the nt, for loss of "parental aid, e g s s d e l & d t t e f s l m

s l s s

y e

protection, affection, society training".

21.3. Filial consortium is compensation in the case of an accident leading to the death of agony to the parents and famil agony for a parent is to lose t Children are valued for their and their role in the family unit.

¶22Consortium is a special pr about the status and worth of jurisdictions world-over have child's consortium far exceed compensation awarded in the ca jurisdictions therefore perm compensation under loss of con The amount awarded to the par of the love, affection, care and child.

¶23The Motor Vehicles Act is a providing relief to the victims genuine claims. In case where child, or unmarried son or daug be awarded loss of consorti consortium. Parental consortiu lose their parents in motor veh few High Courts have awarde However, there was no clarity w which compensation could b consortium.

¶24The amount of compensatio will be governed by the princip under "loss of consortium" as y, discipline, guidance and the right of the parents to n accidental death of a child. An f a child causes great shock and ly of the deceased. The greatest their child during their lifetime. love, affection, companionship . rism reflecting changing norms of actual relationships. Modern recognised that the value of a ds the economic value of the ase of the death of a child. Most mit parents to be awarded nsortium on the death of a child. rents is a compensation for loss companionship of the deceased a beneficial legislation aimed at s or their families, in cases of e a parent has lost their minor ghter, the parents are entitled to ium under the head of filial um is awarded to children who hicle accidents under the Act. A ed compensation on this count. with respect to the principles on be awarded on loss of filial on to be awarded as consortium iples of awarding compensation laid down in Pranay Sethi². In d o n d t . p s n a e t d . s d t f r o l o A

n l m n n

CONCLU

¶13the above dated 19 Fatehabad compensa Sr. No.

¶1Mon

¶2Futu

¶3Dedu expe

¶4Annu

¶5Mult

¶6Loss

¶7Fune

¶8Loss Filia

Tota

Alre

Enha

¶9Supreme Varma 20 Transpor appellants the present case, we deem it a and the sister of the deceased, a loss of filial consortium. USION In view of the law laid down by e referred to judgments, the prese .08.2005 passed by the Moto d is modified. The appellants-cl ation as per the calculations mad Heads nthly Income ure prospects @ 40% uction towards personal enditure (1/2) ual Income tiplier (18) s of Estate eral Expenses s of Consortium 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 s-claimants are granted the inte appropriate to award the father an amount of Rs 40,000 each for y the Hon'ble Supreme Court in ent appeal is allowed. The award or Accident Claims Tribunal, aimants are entitled to enhanced e here-under:- Compensation Awarded (In ) 2,500/- 1,000 (2,500 X 40%) 1,750 (3,500x1/2) 21,000 (1750 x 12) 3,78,000 (21000x18) 18,000 18,000 96,000 5,10,000 1,01,000 4,09,000/- (5,10,000-1,01,000) concerned, as held by Hon'ble ara Banjara Vs. Shyam Singh Others VS. Tamil Nandu State preme Court Cases 107, the erest @ 9% per annum on the r r n d , d e h e e e

enhanced its realiza deposit th the Tribun copy of t amount o award dat their bank issues No company but recov same, the of compe granted to amount from the date of filing ation. The respondent No.4-Insuara he enhanced amount of compen nal within a period of two mon this judgment. The Tribunal is f compensation along with inter ted 19.08.2005. The claimants/a k accounts details to the Tribunal As per award dated 19.08.2005 o.3 and 4 in favour of the insu was directed to deposit the com ery rights were given to the insu insurance company is directed ensation alongwith interest wit o it to recover the same from the Disposed of accordingly. Pending application(s), if any, a of claim petition till the date of ance company is directed to nsation along with interest with nths from the date of receipt of further directed to disburse the rest as per the ratio settled in its appellants are directed to furnish l. 5, the learned Tribunal decided urance company. The insurance mpensation at the first instance, urance company. In view of the to deposit the enhanced amount th the Tribunal and liberty is insured. also stand disposed of. f o h f e s h d e , e t s