Punjab-Haryana High Court
Om Pati And Ors vs Rajpal And Ors on 4 September, 2024
Author: Vikas Bahl
Bench: Vikas Bahl
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:115327
FAO-4570-2015 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
FAO-4570-2015 (O&M)
Date of decision: 04.09.2024
Ompati and others
...Appellants
Versus
Rajpal and others
...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS BAHL
Present: Mr. Saurabh Dalal, Advocate
for the appellants.
Mr.Sanjeev Kodan, Advocate
for respondent no.3-insurance company.
***
VIKAS BAHL, J. (ORAL)
1. The mother and two brothers of Kitab Singh have filed the
present appeal for modification of the award dated 23.09.2014 arising from
MACT case no.30 of 2012 with respect to the death of Kitab Singh in a
motor vehicular accident which took place on 17.06.2012. A prayer has been
made for enhancement of the compensation awarded, which is to the tune of
Rs.2,30,000/-.
2. Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that in the
present case, future prospects have not been granted by the Tribunal and
future prospects to the extent of 40% of the income of the deceased are to be
granted to the claimants. It is submitted that even the multiplier which has
been applied is 5 whereas the multiplier of 17 is to be applied as the age of
the deceased was 30 years at the time of death and that an amount of
1 of 9
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:115327
Rs.1,44,000/- (Rs.48,000/- x 3) is also to be awarded on account of loss of
consortium which has not been granted. It is submitted that the enhanced
amount of compensation be paid to the appellants with interest at the rate of
9% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till its realisation.
In support of his arguments, learned counsel for the appellants has relied
upon the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in cases titled as
Sarla Verma (Smt.) and others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and
another reported as (2009) 6 SCC 121, National Insurance Company
Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi and others reported as (2017) 16 SCC 680, and
Magma General Insurance Company Limited Vs. Nanu Ram alias
Chuhru Ram and others reported as (2018) 18 SCC 130.
3. Learned counsel for the Insurance Company, on the other hand,
has submitted that in the present case, the funeral expenses and the amount
of love and affection which has been granted by the Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal is Rs.25,000/- on each of the two counts respectively whereas as
per the settled law, at best, the amount that can be awarded on account of
funeral expenses and loss of estate is Rs.18,000/- each and thus, the amount
deserves to be decreased from Rs.50,000/- to Rs.36,000. It is submitted that
the interest claimed by the appellants is highly excessive and at best the
interest at the rate of 6% per annum can be granted.
4. Learned counsel for the appellants, in rebuttal, after taking into
consideration the objections raised by the learned counsel for the Insurance
Company, has submitted a revised chart which is reproduced hereinbelow:-
"D.O.A. - 17.06.2012.
Para -23 Deceased - Kitab Singh - Unmarired.
2 of 9
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:115327
Claimants - 1. Mother,
2. Brother ]
] Major
3. Brother ]
Para -26 Age - 30 years
MACT Award
Income - Rs.6000/-
Deduction - ½
Multiplier - 5 - According to the age of
mother
Dependency:- 3000 x 12 x 5 = 1,80,000/-
Funeral expenses = 25,000/-
Love and Affection = 25,000/-
-------------
Total = 2,30,000/-
Compensation would be :-
Income = 6,000/-
Future prospects @ 40% =2400 = 8400/-
Deduction =1/2 = 4200/-
Multiplier = 17
Dependency = 8,56,800/=
Consortium = 48000 x 3 = 1,44,000/-
Funeral expenses = 18,000/-
Loss of estate = 18,000/-
----------------
Total = 10,36,800/-
MACT = 2,30,000/-
----------------
Difference = 8,06,800/- + interest"
5. This Court has heard learned counsel for the parties and has
perused the paper book and has also considered the said revised chart and
the same has been found to be in accordance with law.
3 of 9
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:115327
6. Hon'ble the Supreme Court in para 42 of Sarla Verma's case
(Supra) had observed as under:-
"We therefore hold that the multiplier to be used should
be as mentioned in column (4) of the Table above (prepared by
applying Susamma Thomas, 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-17 for 26 to 30 years, M-16 for 31 to
35 years, M-15 for 36 to 40 years, M-14 for 41 to 45 years, and
M-13 for 46 to 50 years, then reduced by two units for every
five years, that is, M-11 for 51 to 55 years, M-9 for 56 to 60
years, M-7 for 61 to 65 years and M-5 for 66 to 70 years."
A perusal of the above would show that for the age of 30 years,
multiplier of 17 is to be applied.
7. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Pranay Sethi's case (Supra),
has held as under:-
"59.In view of the aforesaid analysis, we proceed to record our
conclusions:-
59.1 The two-Judge Bench in Santosh Devi should have been
well advised to refer the matter to a larger Bench as it was
taking a different view than what has been stated in Sarla
Verma, a judgment by a coordinate Bench. It is because a
coordinate Bench of the same strength cannot take a contrary
view than what has been held by another coordinate Bench.
59.2 As Rajesh has not taken note of the decision in Reshma
Kumari, which was delivered at earlier point of time, the
decision in Rajesh is not a binding precedent.
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
4 of 9
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:115327
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-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. 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
be guided by paragraphs 30 to 32 of Sarla Verma which we
have reproduced hereinbefore.
59.6 The selection of multiplier shall be as indicated in the
Table in Sarla Verma read with paragraph 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 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.
60. The reference is answered accordingly. Matters be placed
before the appropriate Bench."
A perusal of the above judgment would show that it was
observed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court that addition of some percentage of
the actual salary to the income of the deceased towards future prospects was
5 of 9
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:115327
also required to be taken into consideration and the said percentage was
specifically defined with respect to persons who were having a permanent
job or/were self-employed or on a fixed salary. The chart as reproduced in
para 42 of the judgment of Sarla Verma's case (Supra) was approved and a
total amount of Rs.70,000/- on conventional heads namely loss of estate,
loss of consortium or funeral expenses was also mentioned which required to
be enhanced at the rate of 10% in every three years.
8. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Magma General Insurance
Company Limited's case (Supra) had further observed that in death case,
under the head of loss of consortium, the parents of the deceased are entitled
to be awarded loss of consortium under the head of filial consortium,
children are entitled to parental consortium. To the widow, spousal
consortium is to be given. Relevant portion of the said judgment is
reproduced hereinbelow:-
"21. A Constitution Bench of this Court in Pranay Sethi 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
consortium', and 'filial consortium'. The right to consortium
would include the company, care, help, comfort, guidance,
solace and affection of the deceased, which is a loss to his
family. With respect to a spouse, it would include sexual
relations with the deceased spouse.
21.1 Spousal consortium is generally defined as rights
pertaining to the relationship of a husband wife which allows
compensation to the surviving spouse for loss of "company,
society, co-operation, affection, and aid of the other in every
6 of 9
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:115327
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 parents 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 lifetime.
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 have recognized 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
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 companionship 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, 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 5.
However, there was no clarity with respect to the principles on
which compensation could be awarded on loss of Filial
Consortium.
7 of 9
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:115327
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 Sethi (supra). 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 for loss of Filial Consortium."
In the above said judgment, an amount of Rs.40,000/- each was
awarded to the father and sister of the deceased and thus, the amount of
consortium awarded was made dependent upon the number of
claimants/legal representatives.
9. A perusal of the revised chart submitted by learned counsel for
the appellants would show that all the entries in the same are in accordance
with law inasmuch as the amount of Rs.1,44,000/- on account of loss of
consortium has been correctly added and even the multiplier of 17 is
required to be applied in the present case as the age of the deceased was 30
years and the Tribunal has wrongly applied the multiplier of 5. The Tribunal
had not granted any benefit with respect to future prospects and on the said
count, addition of 40% income on account of future prospects has been
rightly mentioned in the revised chart. The amount of funeral expenses and
loss of estate have been correctly decreased in view of the objection taken by
the learned counsel for the insurance company. Thus, accordingly, an
additional amount of Rs.8,06,800/- is to be granted to the appellants-
claimants. With respect to the rate of interest, this Court is consistently
awarding the rate of interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum, which rate of
interest is also reasonable in the present case.
8 of 9
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:115327
10. Accordingly, the present appeal is partly allowed and the
respondent no.3-insurance company is directed to pay an amount of
Rs.8,06,800/- to the present appellants along with interest at the rate of 7.5%
from the date of filing of the claim petition till its realisation in the same
proportion as decided by the Tribunal within a period of six weeks from
today.
(VIKAS BAHL)
JUDGE
September 04, 2024
Davinder Kumar
Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No
Whether reportable:- Yes/No
9 of 9
