Kirna Devi and Ors v. Kamaljeet 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 that no am of estate. consortium be allowe as per sett

4.

¶5whole rec

¶6stated to b asserted t was place has rightl The peru prospects Moreover instead of shows th ontends that the learned Tribun f the deceased-Om Parkash as mount of compensation was gran Moreover, the amount granted m is on lower side. Therefore, h ed and the compensation awarde tled law. I have heard learned counsel cord of this case. A perusal of the award furthe be an agriculturist and was doing o be 10,000/- per month. How ed before the Tribunal to prove th ly assessed the income of the d usal of the award further sho and loss of estate have be r, the learned Tribunal has erred f 16 as per the settled law. Th at the amount of compensatio nal has erred in taking monthly 2,700/-. He further contends nted for future prospects and loss for funeral expenses and loss of he prayed that the present appeal ed by the Tribunal be enhanced for the parties and perused the er shows that the deceased was g dairy work and his income was wever, no documentary evidence his fact. Therefore, the Tribunal deceased as 2,700/- per month. ows that no amount of future een granted by the Tribunal. in applying the multiplier of 17 he perusal of the award further on granted under the heads of y s s f l d e s s e l . e . r f

funeral ex SETTLE

¶7Transpor 121], laid paras of th xpenses and loss of consortium a D LAW ON COMPENSATIO 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 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 are on lower side.

ON 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 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 i s t s s y l t s - s t e e n l r s n s e l e e s

¶8Company clarified Vehicles A 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 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 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 163-A and 168 of the Motor ects:- nal and living expenses to r depending on age of deceased; asis for applying multiplier; d d a d o e e r g e e y , e r o d y e s r o

(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 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 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 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 , h r d e t f o h e e n d a t n n s n

y s t e f

f e k

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.

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 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 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 e y % e f e s n e d e

f e y e r l e e g s s d

¶9Insuranc Others [2 Pranay Relevant p amounts should be enhanced a years." 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 Bench of t 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 protection, affection, society training".

21.3. Filial consortium is compensation in the case of an accident leading to the death of t the rate of 10% in every three the case of Magma General u Ram alias Chuhru Ram & ering Sarla Verma (supra) and he law regarding consortium. d as under:- this Court in Pranay Sethi 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, y, discipline, guidance and the right of the parents to n accidental death of a child. An f a child causes great shock and e l & d . t e f s l m

s l s s

y e

d o n d

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. 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 t . p s n a e t d . s d t f r o l o A

n l

CONCLU

¶10the above dated 03 Kurukshe enhanced Sr. No.

¶1Mon

¶2Futu

¶3Dedu expe

¶4Tota

¶5Mult

¶6Annu

¶7Loss

¶8Fune

¶9Loss Paren Spou Filia

Tota

Alre

Enha

¶24The amount of compensatio will be governed by the princip under "loss of consortium" as 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 .03.2006 passed by the Moto etra is modified. The appell compensation as per the calcula Heads nthly Income ure prospects @ 40% uction towards personal enditure (1/4th) al Income tiplier ual Dependency s of Estate eral Expenses s of Consortium ntal : Rs.48000/- x 2 usal : Rs.48000/- x 1 al : Rs.48000/- x 1 al Compensation eady Awarded by the Tribunal anced Compensation on to be awarded as consortium iples of awarding compensation laid down in Pranay Sethi². In 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, lants-claimants are entitled to ations made hereunder:- Compensation Awarded (In ) 2,700 1,080 (40% of 2700) 945 (1/4th of 3780) 2,835 (3,780-945) 5,44,320 (2825x16x12) 18,000 18,000 1,92,000 7,72,320 3,67,200 4,05,120/- (7,72,320-3,67,200) m n n r r n d , o

¶10Supreme Varma 20 Transpor appellant-enhanced its realiza the enhan Tribunal w of this jud of compe dated 03.0 bank acco 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 intere amount from the date of filing ation. The respondent No.3-Insurance nced amount of compensation within a period of two months f dgment. The Tribunal is further nsation along with interest as p

03.2006. The claimants/appella ounts details to the Tribunal. Disposed of accordingly. Pending application(s), if any, a concerned, as held by Hon'ble ara Banjara Vs. Shyam Singh Others VS. Tamil Nandu State preme Court Cases 107, the est @ 9% per annum on the of claim petition till the date of e Company is directed to deposit n along with interest with the from the date of receipt of copy r directed to disburse the amount per the ratio settled in its award ants are directed to furnish their also stand disposed of. e h e e e f t e y t d r