Punjab-Haryana High Court
Santto And Ors vs Sant Baba Labh Singh Ji And Ors on 7 November, 2024
Author: Sudeepti Sharma
Bench: Sudeepti Sharma
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:147422
FAO-4704-2006
2006 (O&M)
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
FAO
FAO-4704-2006 (O&M)
Date of Decision : 07.11.2024
SMT. SANTTO AND ORS. ....APPELLANTS
VERSUS
SANT BABA LABH SINGH JI AND ORS. ....RESPONDENTS
CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA
Present:- Mr.Abhishek Sharma, Advocate for the appellants.
Ms. Shifa Arora, Advocate for respondents No.1 and 2.
Mr. Pardeep Goyal, Advocate and
Mr. Abhishek Goyal, Advocate for respondent No.3-Ins. Co.
-.-
SUDEEPTI SHARMA,
SHARMA J.
1. The present appeal has been preferred by the claimants/appellants for
enhancement of compensation awarded by the learned Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal, Rupnagar (for short, 'the Tribunal') vide award dated 22.07.2006 under
Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988,
198 , whereby
whereby, the claimants/appellant
/appellants
were awarded a compensation of Rs.3,86,000/
Rs.3,86,000/- along with interest @ 6% per
annum.
FACTS NOT IN DISPUTE
2. Brief facts of the case are that on 21.9.2004 at about 4.30 p.m,
deceased Geeta Sharma was coming from Banga to Nurpur Bedi with her husband
Ram Sharma and her niece Pooja Sharma to meet her relations on scooter No.PB-
No.PB
32-4010. The scooter was being driven by her husband Ram Sharma at normal
speed. The cousin of her husband Ram Sharma namely Sham Sharma was also
1 of 13
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:147422
FAO-4704-2006
2006 (O&M)
following them on another motor cycle alongwith Jatinder Sharma. At about 4.30
p.m, when they reached in the revenue limits of Nalhoti, Tehsil Anand
Anandpur
pur Sahib on
Nurpur Bedi Garhshanker road, in the meanwhile Tata Tempo bearing No.PB-
No.PB
12B-5346
5346 came from Garhshanker side towards Nurpur Bedi which was being
driven by its driver respondent No.2 in a rash and negligent manner at a very high
speed and without
without blowing any horn. The driver of tempo in question after taking
pass from Sham Sharma and Jatinder Sharma, hit the scooter from the back side as
a result of which Geeta Sharma, her husband Ram Sharma and other occupant of
the scooter fell on the pacca road
road and the offending tempo crushed them and they
died at the spot. The accident took place due to rash and negligent driving of
respondent No.2.It is alleged that at the time of death, deceased Geeta Sharma was
aged 35 years, self
sel employed earning Rs.10,000
000/ p.m. and Rs.50,000/- were spent
on transportation, funeral and last rites of the deceased. FIR No.56 dated
21.9.2004
4 under sections 279,304-A,
279,304 427 IPC was recorded at PS Nurpur Bedi
against respondent No. 2.
3. Upon notice of the claim petition, respondents appeared and denied
the factum of accident/compensation.
accident
4. From the pleadings
pleading of the parties, the Tribunal framed the following
issues:-
"1.
1. Whether Geeta Sharma Died in motor vehicle accident,
which was caused by respondent No.2 while driving Tata
Tempo No.PB-12B-5346 inn a rash and negligent manner on
21.9.2004 At About 4.30 p.m in the area of village Nalhoti?
OPP
2 of 13
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:147422
FAO-4704-2006
2006 (O&M)
2. Whether at the time of accident respondent No.2 was not
holding a valid and effective driving licence? If so,its effect ?
OPR-3
3. Whether the claim petition is not maintainable? OPP
4. Whether the claimants are entitled to get any compensation,
if so, to what extent and from whom? OPP
5. Relief."
5. After taking into consideration the pleadings and the evidence on
record, the learned Tribunal awarded compensation to the tune of Rs.
Rs.3,86,000/
00/-
alongwith interest @ 6%
% per annum. Hence the claimants/appellants filed the
present appeal for enhancement of compensation awarded by the Tribunal.
SUBMISSIONS OF THE COUNSELS FOR PART
PARTIES
6. The learned counsel for the claimants
claimants-appellants contends that the
amount assessed by the learned Tribunal is on the lower side. He further contends
that the learned Tribunal erroneously applied multiplier of 16 instead of 18 and no
amount has been granted for future prospects,, loss of consortium and for loss of
estate.. He further contends that the compensation for funeral expenses was on
lower side. He further contends that tribunal has wrongly assessed the dependency
mants/appellants to the extent of 2/3rd whereas it should have been
of the claimant
assessed as 3/4th.
7. Per contra, learned for the respondent
respondents argues that the learned
Tribunal vide award dated 22.07.2006 has rightly assessed the amount of
compensation and, therefore, the appeal is liable to be dismissed
dismissed.
3 of 13
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:147422
FAO-4704-2006
2006 (O&M)
8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the whole
record of this case.
case
9. A perusal of the award indicates that the Tribunal has assessed the
income of the deceased at Rs.3000/- per month relying upon the judgment
Mathura Dutt vs. DTC, 2005 (2) Accident Compensation Judicial Reports 318
in which income of the house wife was assessed to the tune of Rs.3000/
Rs.3000/- per
month. However, no amount was calculated for future prospects, losss of
However,
consortium and for loss of estate and the sum awarded for funeral expenses is also
on the lower side. Therefore, the award requires indulgence of this Court.
SETTLED LAW ON COMPENSATION
10. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sarla Verma Vs. Delhi
121],, laid
Transport Corporation and Another [(2009) 6 Supreme Court Cases 121]
down the law on assessment of compensation and the relevant paras of the same
are as under:-
"30
30.. Though in some cases the deduction to be made towards
personal and living expenses is calculated on the basis of units
personal
indicated in Trilok Chandra, the general practice is to apply
standardised deductions. Having a considered several subsequent
decisions of this Court, we are of the view that where the deceased
was married, the deduction towards personal and living expenses of
the deceased, should be one-third
one third (1/3rd) where the number of
dependent family members is 2 to 3, one
one-fourth
fourth (1/4th) where the
number of dependent family members is 4 to 6, and one
one-fifth
fifth (1/5th)
(1/5th
where the number of dependent family members exceeds six.
4 of 13
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:147422
FAO-4704-2006
2006 (O&M)
31.. Where the deceased was a bachelor and the claimants are the
parents, the deduction follows a different principle. In regard to
bachelors, normally, 50% is deducted as personal and living
expenses, because it is assumed that a bachelor would tend to spend
more on himself. Even otherwise, there is also the possibility of his
getting married in a short time, in which event the contribution to the
parent(s) and siblings is likely to be cut dra
drastically.
stically. Further, subject
to evidence to the contrary, the father is likely to have his own income
and will not be considered as a dependant and the mother alone will
be considered as a dependant. In the absence of evidence to the
contrary, brothers and sisters
sisters will not be considered as dependants,
because they will either be independent and earning, or married, or
be dependent on the father.
32. Thus even if the deceased is survived by parents and siblings,
32.
only d the mother would be considered to be a ddependant,
ependant, and 50%
would be treated as the personal and living expenses of the bachelor
and 50% as the contribution to the family. However, where the family
of the bachelor is large and dependent on the income of the deceased,
as in a case where he has a widowed
widowed mother and large number of
younger non-earning
non earning sisters or brothers, his personal and living
expenses may be restricted to one-third
one third and contribution to the family
will be taken as two-third.
two
* * * * * *
5 of 13
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:147422
FAO-4704-2006
2006 (O&M)
42. We therefore hold that the multiplier to be used should be as
mentioned in Column (4) of the table above (prepared by applying
Susamma Thomas³, Trilok Chandra and Charlie), which starts with
an operative multiplier of 18 (for the age groups of 15 to 20 and 21 to
25 years), reduced by one unit for every five years, that is M
M-17
17 for 26
to 30 years, M-16
M 16 for 31 to 35 years, M
M-15
15 for 36 to 40 years, M-14
M
for 41 to 45 years, and M-13
M 13 for 46 to 50 years, then reduced by two
units for every five years, that is, M
M-11 for 51 to 55 years, M-9
9 for 56
to 60
6 years, M-77 for 61 to 65 years and M
M-5 for 66 to 70 years.
11. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of National Insurance Company
Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi & Ors. [(2017) 16 SCC 680] has clarified the law under
Sections 166, 163-A
163 A and 168 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, on the following
aspects:-
(A) Deduction of personal and living expenses to determine
multiplicand;
(B) Selection of multiplier depending on age of deceased;
(C) Age of deceased on basis for applying multiplier;
(D) Reasonable figures on conventional heads, namely, loss of
estate, loss of consortium and funeral expenses, with escalation;
(E) Future prospects for all categories of persons and for different
ages: with permanent job; self-employed
self employed or fixed salary.
The relevant portion of the judgment is reproduced as under:
under:-
"52. As far as the conventional heads are concerned, we find
it difficult to agree with the view expresse
expressed
d in Rajesh². It has
6 of 13
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:147422
FAO-4704-2006
2006 (O&M)
granted Rs.25,000
25,000 towards funeral expenses, Rs 1,00,000
towards loss of consortium and Rs 1,00
1,00,000
,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 ssay,
ay, 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
fac
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 thee 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. 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 pri
principle.
nciple. But the
revisit should not be fact-centric
centric or quantum
quantum-centric.
centric. We think
7 of 13
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:147422
FAO-4704-2006
2006 (O&M)
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
n a span of three years. We are disposed to hold so because
that will bring in consistency in respect of those heads.
* * * * *
59.3.. While determining the income, an addition of 50% of
actual salary to the income of the deceased towards future
prospects, where the deceased had a permanent job and was
below the age of 40 years, should be made. The addition should
be 30%, if the age of the deceased was between 40 to 50 years.
In case the deceased was between the age of 50 to 60 years, the
addition should be 15%. Actual salary should be read as
actual salary less tax.
59.4.. In case the deceased was self
self-employed
employed (or) on a fixed
salary, an addition of 40% of the established income should be
the warrant where the deceased was below the age of 40 years.
year
An addition of 25% where the deceased was between the age of
40 to 50 years and 10% where the deceased was between the
age of 50 to 60 years should be regarded as the necessary
method of computation. The established income means the
income minus the tax component.
59.5.. For determination of the multiplicand, the deduction for
personal and living expenses, the tribunals and the courts shall
8 of 13
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:147422
FAO-4704-2006
2006 (O&M)
be guided by paras 30 to 32 of Sarla Verma
Verma⁴⁴ which we have
reproduced hereinbefore.
59.6. The selection of multiplier shall be as indicated in the
Table in Sarla Verma¹ read with para 42 of that judgment.
59.7.. The age of the deceased should be the basis for applying
the multiplier.
59.8.. Reasonable figures on conventional heads, namely, loss of
estate, loss of consortium
m and funeral expenses should be Rs
15,000, Rs 40,000 and Rs 15,000 respectively. The aforesaid
amounts should be enhanced at the rate of 10% in every three
years."
12. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Magma General
Insurance Company Limited
Limited Vs. Nanu Ram alias Chuhru Ram &
Others [2018(18) SCC 130] after considering Sarla Verma (supra) and
y Sethi (Supra) has settled the law regarding consortium. Relevant
Pranay
paras of the same are reproduced as under:
under:-
"21.. A Constitution Bench of th
this
is Court in Pranay Sethi² dealt
with the various heads under which compensation is to be
awarded in a death case. One of these heads is loss of
consortium. In legal parlance, "consortium" is a compendious
term which encompasses "spousal consortium", "parental
"paren
consortium", and "filial consortium". The right to consortium
would include the
he company, care, help, comfort, guidance,
solace and affection of the deceased,
eceased, which is a loss to his
9 of 13
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:147422
FAO-4704-2006
2006 (O&M)
-10
- -
family. With respect to a spouse, it would include sexual
xual
relations withh the deceased spouse
spouse.
21.1. Spousal consortium is generally defined as rights
pertaining to the relationship of a husband
husband-wife
wife which allows
compensation to the surviving spouse for loss of "company,
society, cooperation, affection, and aid of the other in every
conjugal relation".
21.2. 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".
21.3. Filial consortium is the right of the pa
parents
rents to
compensation in the case of an accidental death of a child. An
accident leading to the death of a child causes great shock and
agony to the parents and family of the deceased. The greatest
agony for a parent is to lose their child during their lif
lifetime.
etime.
Children are valued for their love, affection, companionship
and their role in the family unit.
22.. Consortium is a special prism reflecting changing norms
about the status and worth of actual relationships. Modern
jurisdictions world-over
over have recognised that the value of a
child's consortium far exceeds the economic value of the
compensation awarded in the case of the death of a child. Most
jurisdictions therefore permit parents to be awarded
10 of 13
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:147422
FAO-4704-2006
2006 (O&M)
-11
- -
compensation under loss of consortium on the death of a child.
The amount awarded to the parents is a compensation for loss
of the love, affection, care and comp
companionship
anionship of the deceased
child.
23.. The Motor Vehicles Act is a beneficial legislation aimed at
providing relief to the victims or their families, in cases of
genuine claims. In case where a parent has lost their minor
child, or unmarried son or daughter
daughter,, the parents are entitled to
be awarded loss of consortium under the head of filial
consortium. Parental consortium is awarded to children who
lose their parents in motor vehicle accidents under the Act. A
few High Courts have awarded compensation on this count.
However, there was no clarity with respect to the principles on
which compensation could be awarded on loss of filial
consortium.
24.. The amount of compensation to be awarded as consortium
will be governed by the principles of awarding compensation
under "loss of consortium" as laid down in Pranay Sethi². In the
present case, we deem it appropriate to award the father and
the sister of the deceased, an amount of Rs 40,000 each
h for loss
of filial consortium.
CONCLUSION
13. In view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the
above referred to judgments, the present appeal is allowed. The award dated
11 of 13
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:147422
FAO-4704-2006
2006 (O&M)
-12
- -
22.07.2006 is modified accordingly. The appellants
appellants-claimants
claimants are entitled to
enhanced compensation as per the calculations
calculations made here
here-under:-
Sr. Heads Compensation Awarded
No.
1 Monthly Income Rs.3000/-
2 Future prospects @ 40% Rs.1200/- (40% of 3000)
3 Deduction towards personal Rs.1050/- [1/4 of
expenditure (3000+1200)]
4. Total Income Rs.3150/- (4200-1050)
5 Annual Dependency Rs.6,04,800/-
(Rs.3150/- x 12 x 16)
6 Loss of Estate Rs.18,000/-
7 Funeral Expenses Rs.18,000/-
8 Loss of Consortium Rs.2,40,000/-
Parental : Rs.48,000/-
Rs.48 x3
Filal: Rs.48,000/-x2
Total Compensation Rs.8,80,800/-
Amount Awarded by the Tribunal Rs.3,86,000/-
Enhanced amount Rs.4,94,800/-
14. So far as the interest part is concerned, as held by Hon'ble Supreme
Court in Dara Singh @ Dhara Banjara Vs. Shyam Singh Varma 2019 ACJ 3176
and R.Valli and Others VS. Tamil Nandu State Transport Corporation (2022) 5
Supreme Court Cases 107, the appellants-claimants
claimants are granted the interest @
9% per annum on the enhanced amount from the date of filing of claim petition till
the date of its realization.
realiza
15. The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the enhanced amount of
compensation along with interest with the Tribunal within a period of two months
from today. The Tribunal is further directed to disburse the enhanced amount of
12 of 13
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:147422
FAO-4704-2006
2006 (O&M)
-13
- -
compensation along
along with interest in the accounts of the claimants/appellants as per
ratio settled in the award dated 22.07.2006.. The claimants/appellants are directed
to furnish their bank account details to the Tribunal.
16. Disposed of accordingly.
17. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.
07.11.2024 ((SUDEEPTI SHARMA)
A.Kaundal JUDGE
Whether speaking/non-speaking
speaking/non speaking : Speaking
Whether reportable : Yes/No
13 of 13
