Delhi High Court
Reliance General Insurance ... vs Smt Anila Rajeev & Ors on 7 September, 2022
$~
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Reserved on : 31.08.2022
Pronounced on: 07.09.2022
+ MAC.APP. 267/2014
RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY
..... Appellant
Through: Ms. Prerna Mehta, Advocate.
versus
SMT ANILA RAJEEV & ORS ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. S.N. Parashar, Advocate
for respondent Nos. 1 & 2.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GAURANG KANTH
JUDGMENT
GAURANG KANTH, J.
1. The present appeal has been preferred by the Appellant under
Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the Award
dated 30.11.2003 passed in MACT No. 328/2012 by the Court
of learned Presiding Officer, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-
II, Dwarka Courts, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as
"Impugned Award").
2. By way of the impugned Award dated 30.11.2003 the learned
Tribunal Awarded a compensation of Rs. 22,55,832/- with
interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the claim
petition i.e. 09.07.2012 till realization and held that the
Insurance Company is liable for payment of the awarded
compensation to the claimants.
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:RITU
DHIRANIA
Signing Date:09.09.2022
17:02:17
3. Ms. Prerna Mehta learned counsel for the Appellant restricted
her arguments with regard to reduction of quantum of
compensation on two heads i.e. deduction of Rs. 1,00,000/-
towards „Love and Affection‟ and deduction of Rs. 1,00,000/-
towards „Loss of Consortium‟. Learned counsel for the
Appellant further contended that in terms of the dicta of
Hon'ble Supreme Court in National Insurance Co. Ltd Vs
Pranay Sethi & Ors reported as 2017 AIR (SC) 5157, the
learned Tribunal erred in granting compensation of
Rs.1,00,000/- towards „Love and Affection‟ and further erred in
granting compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/- under the head „Loss
of Consortium‟ and the same is to be calculated @ Rs. 40,000/-
per legal heir.
4. Mr. S. N. Parashar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
respondents/claimants fairly accepted that in terms of the dicta
of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of Pranay Sethi
(supra), grant of compensation under the head „Love and
Affection‟ has to be deducted from the total amount of
compensation Awarded by the learned Tribunal, however, the
grant of compensation under the head „Loss of Consortium‟ is
fixed @ Rs. 40,000/- with an increase of 10% after a period of
3 years. Learned counsel further contended that in terms of
Pranay Sethi (supra), compensation under the head „Loss of
Estate‟ is required to be provided to the respondents/claimants,
which has not been considered by the learned Tribunal.
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:RITU
DHIRANIA
Signing Date:09.09.2022
17:02:17
5. In rebuttal, Ms. Prerna Mehta, learned counsel for the
Appellant contended that the compensation for „Loss of Estate‟
has been merged by the learned Tribunal while granting
compensation under the head „Funeral Expenses‟ and as such
no separate compensation is to be awarded under the head
„Loss of Estate.‟
6. The arguments raised by the learned counsel for the parties are
purely legal and based on the law settled by the Hon‟ble Apex
Court in Pranay Sethi (supra), which has held as under:-
"54. As far as the conventional heads are concerned,
we find it difficult to agree with the view expressed in
Rajesh. It has granted Rs. 25,000/- towards funeral
expenses, Rs. 1,00,000/- loss of consortium and Rs.
1,00,000/- towards loss of care and guidance for minor
children. The head relating to loss of care and minor
children does not exist. Though Rajesh refers to
Santosh Devi, it does not seem to follow the same. The
conventional and traditional heads, needless to say,
cannot be determined on percentage basis because that
would not be an acceptable criterion. Unlike
determination of income, the said heads have to be
quantified. Any quantification must have a reasonable
foundation. There can be no dispute over the fact that
price index, fall in bank interest, escalation of rates in
many a field have to be noticed. The court cannot
remain oblivious to the same. There has been a thumb
Rule in this aspect. Otherwise, there will be extreme
difficulty in determination of the same and unless the
thumb Rule is applied, there will be immense variation
lacking any kind of consistency as a consequence of
which, the orders passed by the tribunals and courts
are likely to be unguided.
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:RITU
DHIRANIA
Signing Date:09.09.2022
17:02:17
Therefore, we think it seemly to fix reasonable sums. It
seems to us that reasonable figures on conventional
heads, namely, loss of estate, loss of consortium and
funeral expenses should be Rs. 15,000/-, Rs. 40,000/-
and Rs. 15,000/- respectively. The principle of
revisiting the said heads is an acceptable principle. But
the revisit should not be fact-centric or quantum-
centric. We think that it would be condign that the
amount that we have quantified should be enhanced
on percentage basis in every three years and the
enhancement should be at the rate of 10% in a span
of three years"
(emphasis supplied)
7. From the perusal of the aforesaid Judgment it is emphatically
clear that for the conventional heads, namely, „Loss of Estate',
'Loss of Consortium' and 'Funeral Expenses‟ the amount of
compensation is fixed at Rs. 15,000/-, Rs. 40,000/- and Rs.
15,000/-, respectively with an increase of 10% after a period of
3 years. As far as grant of compensation under the head „Love
and Affection‟ is concerned, this Court relies on the judgment
of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of United India
Insurance Company Limited V Satinder Kaur alias Satwinder
Kaur and Ors reported as (2021) 11 SCC 780, which held that
„The Constitution Bench in Pranay Sethi, has recognized only
three conventional heads under which compensation can be
awarded viz. loss of estate, loss of consortium and funeral
expenses. In Magma General, this Court gave a comprehensive
interpretation to consortium to include spousal consortium,
parental consortium, as well as filial consortium. Loss of love
and affection is comprehended in loss of consortium‟.
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:RITU
DHIRANIA
Signing Date:09.09.2022
17:02:17
8. The Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of Satwinder Kaur
(Supra) has further directed to „award compensation for loss of
consortium, which is a legitimate conventional head. There is
no justification to award compensation towards loss of love
and affection as a separate head‟. Accordingly, in terms of the
law settled by the Hon‟ble Supreme Court, the grant of
compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/- under the head „Love and
Affection‟ is unwarranted and deducted from the total
compensation.
9. Learned counsel for the Appellant contended that the
compensation for „Loss of Estate‟ has been merged by the
learned Tribunal while granting compensation under the head
„Funeral Expenses‟ and as such no separate compensation is to
be awarded under the „Loss of Estate‟. This Court after perusal
of the record finds that this argument of learned counsel for the
Appellants holds no ground as the claimants have produced the
bills of actual expenses incurred by them for funeral expenses
and as such grant of compensation under the head „Funeral
Expenses‟ does not include grant of compensation under the
„Loss of Estate‟.
10. In view of the above discussion the impugned Award dated
30.11.2003 is modified to the following extent:
(a) „Loss of Consortium‟ which is granted as
Rs.1,00,000/- by learned Tribunal is modified as
Rs.44,000 X 3 = Rs. 1,32,000/- to be paid to the
respondents/claimants.
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:RITU
DHIRANIA
Signing Date:09.09.2022
17:02:17
(b) „Loss of Estate‟ which has not been granted by the
learned Tribunal is quantified as Rs. 16,500/- to be
paid to the respondents/claimants.
(c) Compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/- paid under the
head „Loss of Love and Affection‟ is comprehended
under the head „Loss of Consortium‟ and is
deducted from the total amount Awarded by the
Tribunal.
11. Accordingly, the computation of compensation by the learned
Tribunal is modified as detailed above.
12. Registry is directed to release the balance amount alongwith
interest to the respondents/claimants after taking into the
account the modification of compensation made by the present
order, within a period of 4 weeks after deducting the
differential amount, if any with accrued interest thereon. The
differential amount, if any, with accrued interest thereon may
be released to the Appellant. The statutory deposit may also be
released to the Appellant.
13. Appeal stands disposed of. No order as to costs.
GAURANG KANTH
(JUDGE)
SEPTEMBER 7, 2022
n
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:RITU
DHIRANIA
Signing Date:09.09.2022
17:02:17
