Tripura High Court
National Insurance Company Ltd vs Sri Rensi Debbarma on 30 July, 2025
HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
AGARTALA
M.A.C. App. No.10 of 2024
National Insurance Company Ltd.,
Agartala Divisional Office, 42, Akhaura
Road, PO-Agartala, P.S.-West Agartala,
Sub-Division- Agartala, District-West Tripura,
PIN-799001, Represented by its
DIVISIONAL MANAGER;
[Insurer of the offending vehicle bearing
Registration no.TR-01-N-1669 (Tripper Truck)].
......Appellant(s)
Versus
1. Sri Rensi Debbarma,
Son of late Joykrishna Debbarma,
Resident of Joychandra Sardar Para,
Paschim Rajnagar, P.S.-Champahaur,
District-Khowai, Tripura;
2. Smt. Biswarani Debbarma,
Wife of Sri Rensi Debbarma,
Resident of Joychandra Sardar Para,
Paschim Rajnagar, P.S.- Champahaur,
District- Khowai, Tripura;
3. Smt. Jayalaxmi Debbarma,
Wife of late Takhirai Debbarma,
D/o Sri Bidya Ranjan Debbarma,
Resident of Joychandra Sardar Para,
Paschim Rajnagar, P.S.-Champahaur,
District-Khowai, Tripura;
4. Sri Pradip Deb,
Son of late Shanti Bhusan Deb,
Resident of Town Ganki, P.O. + P.S. - Khowai,
District - Khowai, Tripura
(owner of the offending vehicle bearing
Registration no. TR-01-N-1669 (Tripper Truck);
5. Sri Goutam Deb,
Son of Sri Gouranga Deb,
Resident of Dhalabil, P.O. + P.S. - Khowai,
District - Khowai, Tripura
(driver of the offending vehicle bearing
Registration no.TR-01-N-1669 (Tripper Truck).
......Respondent(s)
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Sankar Lodh, Adv.
Mr. Subham Majumder, Adv.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Samarjit Bhattacharjee, Adv.
Date of Hearing &
Delivery of
Judgment and
Order : 30.07.2025
Whether fit for
Reporting : YES
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BISWAJIT PALIT
Judgment & Order(Oral)
This appeal is preferred by the appellant
Insurance Company challenging the judgment and award
dated 22.09.2022 delivered by Learned Member, Motor
Accident Claims Tribunal, Khowai Judicial District, Tripura in
connection with Case No.T.S. (MAC) 04 of 2019.
2. Heard Learned Counsel, Mr. S. Lodh appearing on
behalf of the appellant-Insurance Company. Also heard
Learned Counsel, Mr. S. Bhattacharjee appeared on behalf of
the claimant respondents. But none appears on behalf of the
respondent No.4 (owner of the offending vehicle) and
respondent No.5 (driver of the offending vehicle).
3. At the time of hearing, Learned Counsel, Mr. S.
Lodh appearing for the appellant-Insurance Company drawn
the attention of the Court that Learned Tribunal below at the
time of delivery of judgment relying upon the judgment of
Santhya Rani Debbarma and Others Vs. National
Insurance Company Ltd. awarded compensation under the
following heads:-
Head Amount
Funeral expenses Rs.25,000/-
Loss of consortium Rs.1,00,000/-
Loss of love and Rs.1,00,000/-
affection to aged
parents
Loss of estate Rs.1,00,000/-
Litigation costs Rs.25,000/-
Total Rs.3,50,000/-
Referring the aforesaid heads, Learned Counsel
for the appellant has drawn the attention of the Court that in
view of the latest judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of
India, there is/was no scope on the part of the Learned
Tribunal below to award separate amount for loss of
consortium, loss of love and affection and loss of estate. By
the said judgment Learned Tribunal below awarded
Rs.1,00,000/- for each of the aforesaid heads which was not
permissible in the eye of law and as such Learned Counsel
for the appellant urged for interference of the judgment
delivered by the Learned Tribunal below.
4. In support of his contention, Learned Counsel, Mr.
Lodh relied upon the citation of the Hon'ble Supreme Court
of India in National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Pranay
Shethi and Others reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680
wherein in Para No.52, the Hon'ble Apex Court observed as
under:-
"52. As far as the conventional heads are
concerned, we find it difficult to agree with the
view expressed in Rajesh [Rajesh v. Rajbir Singh,
(2013) 9 SCC 54]. It has granted Rs. 25,000
towards funeral expenses, Rs. 1,00,000 towards
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 (supra) refers to
Santosh Devi [Santosh Devi v. National Insurance
Co. Ltd., (2012) 6 SCC 421], 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
band 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
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. We are disposed to hold so because that
will bring in consistency in respect of those
heads."
5. Learned Counsel, Mr. S. Lodh also relied upon
another citation of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in
Smt. Sarla Verma and Ors. Vs. Delhi Transport
Corporation and Anr. reported in 2009 AIR SCW 4992
and finally Learned Counsel relied upon another citation of
the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Sunita Vs. Vinod
Singh reported in 2025 SCC OnLine SC 586 wherein in
Para No.11, the Hon'ble Apex Court observed as under:-
"11. The amount arrived at by the High Court of
the monthly income being Rs. 5,819/- (Rupees
Five Thousand Eight Hundred and Nineteen) as
against the claim of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten
Thousand) appears to be on the lower side as the
total earning of the deceased from family pension
itself ought to have been considered which itself
would come to Rs. 5,137/- (Rupees Five
Thousand One Hundred and Thirty-Seven) to
which the notional wages as a home maker had to
be added, which we find is reasonable as has
been taken by the High Court at Rs. 2,500/-
(Rupees Two Thousand Five Hundred). Thus, the
monthly income would come to Rs. 7,637/-
(Rupees Seven Thousand Six Hundred and Thirty
Seven), which we are inclined to round off at Rs.
7,000/- (Rupees Seven Thousand). Coming to the
multiplier factor which is dependent on the age,
there is sufficient indication that the deceased
was aged about 45 years as per the Post-Mortem
Report which is a scientific assessment of the age
of the deceased. The purported discrepancy in the
age with regard to that of the claimant and the
deceased is erroneous for the reason that when
the claim was filed, appellant no. 1 was aged
about 30 years and a difference of 15 years
between the daughter-in-law and the mother-in-
law cannot be said to be totally devoid of reality
given the contextual and prevalent societal norms
in vogue at the time of marriage of the deceased
which could have been at least 25 to 30 years
prior to her death i.e., in or about the 1970s.
Moreover, in the absence of material indicating to
the contrary, there is no inhibition to accept the
age of the deceased as per the Post-Mortem
Report. Thus, we are inclined to grant her the
benefit of multiplier of 14 taking her age as 45
years. With regard to the loss of love and
affection, Pranay Sethi (supra) grants Rs.
40,000/-(Rupees Forty Thousand) per head with
escalation of 10% every three years for loss of
consortium which has been interpreted in Magma
General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nanu Ram, (2018)
18 SCC 130 to include spousal, parental, and filial
consortium. Thus, there being five claimants the
amount shall be [Rs. 48,000/- × 5] which comes
to Rs. 2,40,000/-(Rupees Two Lakhs and Forty
Thousand) payable under the head of loss of love
and affection."
Referring the same, Learned Counsel submitted
that in view of the principle of law laid down by the Hon'ble
Apex Court, there is no scope to award separate amount for
the aforesaid 3 (three) heads and urged before the Court to
consider only one head i.e. loss of consortium for the
purpose of 'just' compensation and urged for modification of
the judgment and award delivered by Learned Tribunal below
by allowing this appeal.
6. Now, let us discuss about the subject matter of
appeal. The respondent claimant petitioners filed one claim
petition before the Learned Tribunal alleging inter alia that
on 11.09.2018 while the deceased Takhirai Debbarma was
proceeding towards his house at Joychandra Sardar Para by
riding his motor cycle bearing No.TR-06-A-8194 that time a
tripper truck loaded with bricks bearing No.TR 01-N-1669
dashed against the victim from his backside. As a result of
which he fell down on the road. It was further submitted by
the respondent- claimant petitioners that soon after the
accident the driver fled away from the PO. The local people
shifted him to hospital where he was declared as dead. It
was also the case of the respondent-claimant petitioners that
at the time of accident the deceased was 34 years old and
his monthly income was Rs.15,000/- per month and he
survived by his parents and wife. His parents and wife were
totally dependent upon him. In this regard, one criminal case
vide Champahour PS Case No.29/2018 under Section
279/304 (Part-II) of IPC read with Section 184/187/177 of
MV Act was registered.
7. Before the Learned Tribunal the OP Nos.1 and 2
have contested the case by filing their written
statement/objection denying the assertions of the
respondent claimant petitioners in their claim petition.
However, the owner took the plea that the vehicle was duly
insured with the appellant National Insurance Company Ltd.
It was also submitted that, if any, liability is imposed that
should be borne by the Insurance Company.
8. The OP No.3 being the National Insurance
Company Ltd. before the Learned Tribunal below denied the
assertions of the claimant petitioners and submitted that the
claim petition is subjected to strict proof by the claimant
petitioners.
9. Upon the pleadings of the parties Learned Tribunal
below framed the following issues:-
(I) Whether the accident occurred on
11.09.2018 at about 11.00 a.m. on Khowai-
Tulasikhar road near Parchim Rajnagar High
School (Chandranath Thakurpara) which
resulted in the death of Takhirai Debbarma,
S/o Sri Rensi Debbarma of Joysardar Para
(Parchim Rajnagar) on account of rash and
negligent driving by the driver of the offending
vehicle bearing Reg No.TR-01-N-1669.
(II) Whether the OP is the registered owner of
the vehicle bearing Reg No.TR-01-N-1669
(Tripper Truck) and said vehicle was having
valid and effective vehicular documents
including insurance policy.
(III) Whether the deceased was earning
Rs.15,000/- per month.
(IV) Whether the claimants are entitled to get
any compensation, if so, to what extent and
payable by whom.
(V) To what relief/reliefs if any, the claimants
are entitled.
In order to prove the issues, both the parties have
adduced oral/documentary evidence on record.
10. Finally, on conclusion of the enquiry the Learned
Tribunal below by the judgment and award dated 22.09.2022
allowed the claim petition. The operative portion of the
Order/Award of the Learned Tribunal below runs as follows:-
Order
Being the insurer of the offending vehicle, the
OP No.3, the National Insurance Company Ltd (OP
No.03) is to pay the awarded compensation amount
of Rs.32,06,000/- (rupees thirty two lakh and six
thousand only) along with interest @ 9% perannum
within 60 days from the date of passing of this
award.
The claimant-petitioner No.1 Smt. Biswarani
Debbarma is entitled to get compensation for an
amount of Rs.16,03,000/- only and the claimant-
petitioner No.3, Smt. Jayalaxmi Debbarma is
entitled to get an amount of Rs.16,03,000/- only
and the OP No.3, the National Insurance Company
Ltd. is to pay the awarded amount of compensation
to the claimant petitioners with 9% interest
perannum from the date of filing of the claim
petition by the claimant-petitioners till the date of
payment. Out of the amount of total compensation
50% of the awarded amount be kept in fixed deposit
scheme in any Nationalized Bank for a period of 5
(five) years and the said claimant petitioners if
desire will be at liberty to draw the monthly interest
to be accrued from the fix deposit scheme.
Let a copy of this award be supplied to the
petitioners as well as the OP No.3 free of cost.
With my above observation this petition is
disposed of.
Challenging that award the appellant Insurance
Company has preferred this appeal.
11. I have heard both the sides at length and also
perused the judgment and award delivered by the Learned
Tribunal below. The Learned Tribunal below at the time of
delivery of judgment and award determined the amount of
compensation in total Rs.32,06,000/- (Rupees thirty two
lakhs six thousand) and fastened the liability of payment of
compensation upon the present appellant Insurance
Company. From the judgment of the Learned Tribunal
further it appears that at the time of determination of
compensation towards loss of consortium, towards loss of
love and affection to aged parents and towards loss of estate
a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- was awarded by the Learned Tribunal
under each of the said heads.
12. On perusal of the judgment of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court of India in National Insurance Company
Ltd. Vs. Pranay Shethi and Others reported in (2017) 16
SCC 680 in Para No.52, the Hon'ble Apex Court observed
that for loss of estate, loss of consortium and funeral
expenses an amount of Rs.15,000/-, Rs.40,000/- and
Rs.15,000/- was awarded. Under each of the separate heads
with a further observation that there should be enhancement
on percentage basis in every 3 (three) years and the
enhancement should be @10% in a span of 3 (three) years.
13. Furthermore, Hon'ble the Supreme Court of India
in the judgment of Sunita Vs. Vinod Singh (supra) in Para
No.11 also confirmed the said fact and taking into
consideration the principle laid down in the said judgment,
here in the given case, the respondent claimant petitioners
Smt. Biswarani Debbarma, W/O- Sri Rensi Debbarma being
the mother of the deceased and Smt. Jayalaxmi Debbarma,
W/O- Late Takhirai Debbarma (deceased) are entitled to get
Rs.48,000/- (Rupees forty eight thousand) each towards the
said loss of love and affection which shall include consortium.
14. In this regard, Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in
United India Insurance Company Limited Vs. Satinder
Kaur Alias Satwinder Kaur and Others reported in
(2021) 11 SCC 780 in Para Nos.34 and 35 further observed
as under:-
"34. At this stage, we consider it necessary to
provide uniformity with respect to the grant of
consortium, and loss of love and affection.
Several Tribunals and the High Courts have been
awarding compensation for both loss of
consortium and loss of love and affection. The
Constitution Bench in Pranay Sethi [National
Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi, (2017) 16 SCC
680], has recognised only three conventional
heads under which compensation can be awarded
viz. loss of estate, loss of consortium and funeral
expenses. In Magma General [Magma General
Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nanu Ram, (2018) 18 SCC
130], 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.
35. The Tribunals and the High Courts are 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."
From the aforesaid observation of the Hon'ble
Apex Court it appears that, the Hon'ble Apex Court also
directed for granting compensation only under three
conventional heads under which compensation can be
awarded like loss of estate, loss of consortium and funeral
expenses and further observed that loss of love and affection
is comprehended in loss of consortium and directed the High
Court and the Learned Tribunal to award compensation for
loss of consortium which is a legitimate conventional act and
further clarified that there is no justification to award
compensation towards loss of love and affection as a
separate head.
15. So, in view of the aforesaid principle of law laid
down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the given case it appears
that Learned Tribunal below committed error in awarding
compensation to the respondent claimant petitioners
separately under the head loss of consortium Rs.1,00,000/-,
loss of love and affection to aged parents Rs.1,00,000/- and
loss of estate Rs.1,00,000/- which should be modified to
extent that under the head loss of consortium the
respondent claimant petitioners would get Rs.(48,000 x 2)/-
= Rs.96,000/- as per judgment of Pranay Shethi (supra),
towards funeral expenses Rs.25,000/- and towards loss of
estate Rs.15,000/- x 20% i.e. Rs.18,000/- as per Pranay
Shethi (supra). Regarding litigation cost as there was no
point of argument by the Learned Counsel for the appellant
so the same amount may be allowed to be given to the
respondent claimant petitioners Rs.25000/-. Hence, the total
amount of compensation would comes to Rs.28,56,000/-
(loss of dependency)+ Rs.25,000/- (funeral expenses) +
Rs.96,000/-(loss of consortium) + Rs.18,000/- (loss of
estate) + Rs.25,000/- (litigation cost) which comes at
Rs.30,20,000/- (Rupees thirty lakhs twenty thousand) only
after calculation.
It was also found that the Learned Tribunal below
at the time of delivery of judgment awarded interest @9%
which appears to be in higher side. As such the rate of
interest would be 7.5% only. To avoid any confusion it is
ordered that all the Tribunals under the jurisdiction of the
High Court at the time of determination of compensation
shall follow the guidelines of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the
aforenoted cases and shall award com pensation for loss of
consortium only which is a legitimate conventional head
ignoring award of compensation towards loss of love and
affection as a separate head in dealing with claim cases
under MV Act.
16. Registrar (Judicial), High Court of Tripura be
asked to circulate a copy of judgment/order to all the
Learned Tribunals of the State to look into the matter.
17. In the result, the appeal filed by the appellant
Insurance Company is allowed with the modification that the
respondent claimant petitioners would be entitled to get total
amount of compensation of Rs.30,20,000/- (Rupees thirty
lakhs twenty thousand) along with 7.5% interest per annum
from the date of filing the claim petition that is on and from
29.01.2024 to till the date of realization/payments.
The appellant Insurance Company shall deposit
the amount to the Registry of the High Court within a period
of 2 months from the date of delivery of judgment if not
deposited to the Learned Tribunal below. However, the
disbursal of payment would be made in pursuance of the
judgment delivered by the Learned Tribunal below on
22.09.2022.
With this observation, this present appeal stands
disposed of.
Send down the record to the Learned Tribunal
below along with a copy of this judgment/order.
Supply a copy of this judgment/order to Learned
Counsel for the appellant Insurance Company for information
and compliance and also a copy of this judgment/order be
furnished to Learned Counsel for the respondent claimant
petitioners for information.
Pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of
accordingly.
JUDGE
Amrita
AMRITA DEB AMRITA DEB
Date: 2025.08.01 17:26:16
+05'30'
