Iffco Toko General Insurance ... vs Sushma Devi And Ors
2022 Latest Caselaw 1606 P&H

  125 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                    CHANDIGARH

                                              FAO-517-2022 (O&M)
                                              Date of decision: 14.03.2022

IFFCO TOKIO General Insurance Company Limited

                                               ....Appellant
            Versus

Sushma Devi and others                        ..Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL

Present: Ms. Swati Batra, Advocate for the appellant

ANIL KSHETARPAL, J (Oral)

The hearing of the case is being held through video

conferencing on account of restricted functioning of the Courts.

The Insurance Company calls into question the correctness

of the award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,

Kurukshetra (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal') while allowing the

claim petition filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988,

on account of death of late Sh. Shiv Kumar, aged 29 years in an

automobile accident. The Tribunal, after assessing the income of the

deceased at the rate of Rs.35,000/- per month, has ordered payment of

Rs.76,87,000/- to the widow, minor daughter and parents of the

deceased.

Heard learned counsel representing the appellant and with

her able assistance perused the judgment passed by the Tribunal and

examined the record of the Tribunal, which was requisitioned. Learned

counsel representing the appellant has contended as under:-

i) The Tribunal has erred in assessing the income of the

deceased at the rate of Rs.35,000/- per month as it was found that except

1 of 3

Income Tax Return, Ex.P-19, the remaining returns were never filed.

ii) The Tribunal has erred in deducting 1/4th of the

income for self and living expenses of the deceased, particularly, when

total family members excluding the father of the deceased were four.

iii) She further contends that the Tribunal has erred in

awarding loss of consortium at the rate of Rs.40,000/- each to widow,

parents and the minor daughter of the deceased.

As regards, the first argument of the learned counsel

representing the appellant, it may be noted that income tax return, Ex.P-

19, is with respect to the assessment year 2016-17. As per the aforesaid

return, the net income of the deceased was Rs.4,18,365/- per annum after

excluding the expenses. If the amount of Rs.4,18,635/- is divided, the

monthly income comes to Rs.34,886.25. The aforesaid return was

uploaded on 12.07.2016 whereas the accident took placed on

21.03.2019. The Tribunal has also ignored the remaining income tax

returns as its correctness was doubted by the Insurance Company. There

is no doubt about the genuineness of Ex.P19, income tax return filed in

July, 2016. There is further no evidence to prove that the income of the

deceased came down after 2016. The deceased was a young boy of 29

years, who was running a mobile repair shop. He was an income tax

payee. In such circumstances, there is no substance in the first

argument.

The second argument of the learned counsel representing

the appellant is with respect to deduction on account of self and living

expenses. It may be noted here that even if the father of the deceased,

2 of 3

who is aged about 65 years, is excluded still the total family members

including the deceased were four. In such circumstances, the Tribunal

has correctly ordered deduction of 1/4th from the income of the deceased

for self and living expenses.

The next argument is with regard to loss of consortium to

each of the claimants at the rate of Rs.40,000/-. No doubt, a Five Judges

Bench in 'National Insurance Company Ltd. vs. Pranay Sethi and

other' 2017 (10) SCC 450 held that the total amount of loss of

consortium can be Rs.40,000/- only. However, subsequently, this

judgment has been explained in Magma General Insurance Company

Limited vs. Nanu Ram @ Chuhru Ram and others 2018 (4)

RCR(Civil) 333, New India Assurance Co. Ltd. vs. Somwati and

others Civil Appeal No.3093 of 2020, decided on 07.09.2020 and

United India Insurance Company Ltd. vs. Satinder Kaur @

Satwinder Kaur and others, (2020) SCC Online 410. In all these

judgments, it has been held that loss of consortium is allowed to child,

widow and each of the parents. In view thereof, no ground to interfere is

made out.

Hence, dismissed.

All the pending miscellaneous applications, if any, are also

disposed of.

14.03.2022                                       (ANIL KSHETARPAL)
rekha                                                 JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned :         Yes/No
Whether reportable :                Yes/No




                                  3 of 3