On 30th September 2020 the High Court Of Chhattisgarh in the case of Smt. Rekha Sinh & Ors. V. Shivmurti & Ors. comprising of a single Bench of Justice Sanjay S. Agrawal, held that Parental consortium is granted to the child upon the premature death of a parent, for loss of “parental aid, protection, affection, society, discipline, guidance, and training.
Factual Background
This Miscellaneous Appeal has been preferred by the Claimants under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, questioning the legality and propriety of the award passed by the Tribunal whereby, the Tribunal, while allowing the claim in part, has awarded a total amount of compensation to the tune of Rs.5,80,000/- with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment.
On 08.01.2011 the deceased was returning home by his motorcycle. At the relevant time, he was hit vehemently by the offending vehicle “truck”, owned by non-applicant No.2 and insured with Non-Applicant No.3, which was being driven in a rash and negligent manner by its driver, Non-Applicant No.1. Owing to the alleged accident, the deceased fell down and sustained serious injuries and died on the spot.
A criminal case was registered against the driver of the alleged offending vehicle under Section 304-A IPC and a charge sheet was thereafter submitted before the Judicial Magistrate. On account of the aforesaid accident, the Claimants being the legal representatives of the deceased, filed a Claim Petition under Section 166 of the Act of 1988 wherein, it has been alleged that the deceased, was a grocery shop keeper apart from running the STD/PCO and used to earn Rs.10,000/- per month and therefore, they have claimed total amount of compensation to the tune of Rs.17,88,000/- under various heads.
The Non-applicants have contested the aforesaid claim and the Tribunal, after considering the evidence led by the parties, arrived at the conclusion that the alleged accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the alleged offending vehicle resulting in the sad demise of the deceased. It held further that the vehicle in question was not being used in violation of the policy, as it was being driven with a valid permit and fitness certificate by the driver, who was holding a valid and effective driving license. In consequence, while fastening the liability upon the Insurance Company that by assessing the monthly income of the deceased to the tune of Rs.3,000/ and by applying the multiplier of 15, awarded the aforesaid amount of compensation along with the interest.
Submissions on behalf of the Appellant
According to the counsel appearing for the Appellants, while referring to the income tax returns of the deceased, marked as Ex.A-14 and Ex.A-15, the finding of the Tribunal holding the monthly income of the deceased only to the tune of Rs.3,000/- despite the filing of the said returns is apparently contrary to the materials placed on record and thereby erred further in awarding a meager amount of compensation even without considering the future prospects of his income and without deducting 1/4th of his income towards his personal and living expenses. In support, he placed his reliance upon the decision rendered by the Supreme Court in the matters of “ National Insurance Company Limited. vs. Pranay Sethi & Others and Sarla Verma (Smt) And Others vs. Delhi Transport Corporation And Another” reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680 and (2009) 6 SCC 121, respectively.
Submissions on behalf of the respondent
On the other hand, the learned Counsel for Respondent No.3 has supported the award impugned as passed by the Tribunal.
Court Analysis
From the perusal of the record, it appears that the amount of compensation as determined by the Tribunal while assessing the monthly income of the deceased only to the extent of Rs.3,000/- even without considering the future prospects of his income is wholly unjustified and deserves to be modified. According to the averments made in the claim Petition and in view of the unrebutted statement of the deceased's wife, it is evident that the deceased was a grocery shop keeper and was also engaged in running the fancy store as well as the STD/PCO. Besides, the minors of the deceased, who lost their father upon his premature death are entitled to the parental consortium as per the principles laid down by the Supreme Court in the matter of Magma General Insurance Company Limited vs. Nanu Ram Alias Chuhru Ram and others reported in (2018) 18 SCC 130, In the present case, the deceased died in a road accident at the age of 38 years, leaving behind him wife, two minors and the parents. Therefore, in the light of the principles laid down in the aforesaid judgment, the wife and minors are entitled to be awarded loss of consortium under the head of spousal and parental consortium at the rate as held in the said matter of Pranay Sethi.
Judgment
It is observed further that if the widow and parents want to withdraw a part of it or the entire deposited amount of their share during the said period of three years, then they are at liberty to move an application for the said purpose before the concerned Executing Court, which may be considered by it and an appropriate order may be passed in this regard. In view of the above, the appeal was accordingly allowed in part to the extent indicated hereinabove with the aforesaid observation. The rest of the observations as made by the Tribunal shall remain intact. No order as to costs.
Read Judgment @Latestlaws.com
