Rampati and Anr v. Fusa Lal and Ors

IN T

Rampati and Oth Fusa Lal and O

CORAM : HON

Present: Mr

for

Mr SUDEEPTI SH

1.

The enhancement of Tribunal, Bhiwa Section 166 of were awarded a annum.

2.

The year 2006, with pending final a incident which t rendered illegibl

THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJ AT CHANDIGA -.-

FA Da hers

VERSUS Ors.

N'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUDE r. Anil Ghanghas and Mr. Abhis the appellants. r. Gopal Mittal, Advocate for resp -.- HARMA, J. (Oral)

e present appeal has been prefer f compensation awarded by th ani (for short, 'the Tribunal') v the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, a compensation of Rs.1,00,000/ e present appeal stems from an h considerable time having passe adjudication. The case file ha took place in this Court in the ye le and unreadable.

JAB AND HARYANA ARH AO-1525-2006 (O&M) ate of Decision : 08.11.2024

....Appellants

....Respondents EEPTI SHARMA shek Patel, Advocates pondent – Insurance Co. rred by the claimants/appellants he learned Motor Accident Cla vide award dated 03.10.2005 un whereby, the claimants/appella /- along with interest @ 7.5% n accident which took place in ed while the instant appeal rema as been partially burnt due to ear 2011 resulting in the facts be

for ims nder ants per ains fire

3.

Up do not possess properly.

4.

In loss/destruction this Court is lef the facts of the c SUBMISSIONS

5.

Lea assessed by the deceased was d has erred in taki any documentar assessed at least Further the lear Moreover, the towards funeral towards loss of be allowed and t

6.

Per the learned Trib of compensation

7.

I h record of this ca

on enquiry by this Court, the pa a complete brief of the instant c the light of the facts and ci of the case file as well as the ft with no option but to dispens case in this judgment. S OF LEARNED COUNSELS arned counsel for the claimants-a learned Tribunal is on the lower driver and was earning Rs.5,000 ing adverse inference from the e ry proof of salary, therefore the t Rs.5,000/- per month as skille rned Tribunal has wrongly app learned Tribunal has also err expenses which is on the lower estate and consortium. He, ther the amount of compensation be e r contra, learned for the responde bunal vide award dated 03.10.20 n. Therefore, he prays for dismis have heard learned counsel for ase.

arties to the appeal stated that th case and unable to assist the Co ircumstances and considering absence of complete papers bo se with the requirement to set fo S FOR THE PARTIES appellants contends that the amo r side. He further contends that 0/- per month, but learned Tribu vidence of PW-3 on non-produc income of the deceased should ed worker and not that of labou lied multiplier of 5 instead of red in granting the compensat r side and not granting any amo refore, prays that the present app enhanced, as per latest law. ent-Insurance Company argues t 005 has rightly assessed the amo ssal of the present appeal. the parties and perused the wh

hey ourt full ook, orth ount unal cing d be urer.

¶18tion ount peal that ount

8.

A p and was a driver case, his income minimum wage the learned Trib keeping in view the compensatio been awarded to requires indulge SETTLED LAW

9.

Ho Transport Corp down the law o are as under:- "30 per ind stan dec was dep num whe

perusal of the award indicates th r by profession. However, unde e is to be assessed as Rs.2100/- s prescribed for the skilled work bunal should have been applie w of the age of the deceased. A p on towards funeral expenses is on owards towards loss of estate an ence of this Court. W ON COMPENSATION n'ble Supreme Court in the poration and Another [(2009) 6 on assessment of compensation

¶0Though in some cases the rsonal and living expenses is dicated in Trilok Chandra, th ndardised deductions. Having cisions of this Court, we are of s married, the deduction toward e deceased, should be one-thir pendent family members is 2 t mber of dependent family memb ere the number of dependent fam

at the deceased was 21 years of er the prevailing facts of the pres - per month in accordance with ker in the State of Haryana. Furt ed a multiplier of 18 instead o perusal of award further reveals t n the lower side and no amount nd consortium. Therefore, the aw case of Sarla Verma Vs. De 6 Supreme Court Cases 121], l and the relevant paras of the sa e deduction to be made towa calculated on the basis of un he general practice is to ap a considered several subsequ f the view that where the decea ds personal and living expenses rd (1/3rd) where the number to 3, one-fourth (1/4th) where bers is 4 to 6, and one-fifth (1/5 mily members exceeds six.

age sent ther of 5 that has ward elhi laid ame ards nits pply uent ased s of r of 5th)

¶31par bac exp mo get par to e and be con bec be only wou and of t as you exp wil *

Where the deceased was a ba rents, the deduction follows a chelors, normally, 50% is d penses, because it is assumed th re on himself. Even otherwise, tting married in a short time, in rent(s) and siblings is likely to b evidence to the contrary, the fath d will not be considered as a de considered as a dependant. I ntrary, brothers and sisters will cause they will either be indepe dependent on the father.

¶2Thus even if the deceased is ly d the mother would be consid uld be treated as the personal a d 50% as the contribution to the the bachelor is large and depend in a case where he has a wido unger non-earning sisters or b penses may be restricted to one-t ll be taken as two-third.

*

*

achelor and the claimants are different principle. In regard deducted as personal and liv hat a bachelor would tend to sp there is also the possibility of which event the contribution to be cut drastically. Further, subj her is likely to have his own inco ependant and the mother alone w In the absence of evidence to l not be considered as dependa endent and earning, or married, survived by parents and siblin dered to be a dependant, and 5 and living expenses of the bache e family. However, where the fam dent on the income of the deceas owed mother and large number brothers, his personal and liv third and contribution to the fam *

*

*

d to ving end f his ject ome will nts, , or ngs, 50% elor mily sed, r of ving

¶42men Sus an 25 y to 3 for uni to 6

10.

Ho Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sections 166, 1 aspects:-

(A) mu

(B)

(C)

(D) esta

(E) age The

We therefore hold that the m ntioned in Column (4) of the t samma Thomas³, Trilok Chandr operative multiplier of 18 (for th years), reduced by one unit for e 30 years, M-16 for 31 to 35 yea 41 to 45 years, and M-13 for 4 its for every five years, that is, M 60 years, M-7 for 61 to 65 years n'ble Supreme Court in the case y Sethi & Ors. [(2017) 16 SCC 63-A and 168 of the Motor Ve ) Deduction of personal an ultiplicand; ) Selection of multiplier depen ) Age of deceased on basis for ) Reasonable figures on con ate, loss of consortium and funer ) Future prospects for all cate es: with permanent job; self-emp e relevant portion of the judgmen "52. As far as the conventi it difficult to agree with the

multiplier to be used should be table above (prepared by apply ra and Charlie), which starts w he age groups of 15 to 20 and 21 every five years, that is M-17 for ars, M-15 for 36 to 40 years, M 46 to 50 years, then reduced by M-11 for 51 to 55 years, M-9 for and M-5 for 66 to 70 years. e of National Insurance Comp C 680] has clarified the law un ehicles Act, 1988, on the follow nd living expenses to determ nding on age of deceased; r applying multiplier; nventional heads, namely, loss ral expenses, with escalation; egories of persons and for differ ployed or fixed salary. nt is reproduced as under:- ional heads are concerned, we f e view expressed in Rajesh². It

e as ying with 1 to r 26 M-14 two r 56 pany nder wing mine of rent find

granted Rs.25,000 towards towards loss of consortium care and guidance for minor of care and minor children d to Santosh Devi, it does n conventional and traditional determined on percentage b acceptable criterion. Unlike heads have to be quantified reasonable foundation. Ther that price index, fall in ba many a field have to be n oblivious to the same. Ther aspect. Otherwise, there determination of the same an there will be immense variat as a consequence of which, and courts are likely to be seemly to fix reasonable sum figures on conventional hea consortium and funeral Rs.40,000 and Rs.15,000 revisiting the said heads is revisit should not be fact-cen

s funeral expenses, Rs 1,00,0 and Rs 1,00,000 towards loss r children. The head relating to l does not exist. Though Rajesh ref not seem to follow the same. T l heads, needless to say, cannot basis because that would not be e determination of income, the s d. Any quantification must hav re can be no dispute over the f nk interest, escalation of rates noticed. The court cannot rem re has been a thumb rule in t will be extreme difficulty nd unless the thumb rule is appli tion lacking any kind of consiste the orders passed by the tribun e unguided. Therefore, we think ms. It seems to us that reasona ads, namely, loss of estate, loss expenses should be Rs.15,0 respectively. The principle s an acceptable principle. But ntric or quantum-centric. We th

s of loss fers The t be e an said ve a fact s in main this in ied, ncy nals k it able s of 000, of

that it would be condign quantified should be enhan three years and the enhance in a span of three years. W that will bring in consistency *

*

59.3. While determining th actual salary to the incom prospects, where the deceas below the age of 40 years, sh be 30%, if the age of the dec In case the deceased was bet addition should be 15%. actual salary less tax.

59.4. In case the deceased salary, an addition of 40% o the warrant where the decea An addition of 25% where th 40 to 50 years and 10% wh age of 50 to 60 years shou method of computation. Th income minus the tax compon

59.5. For determination of t personal and living expenses

that the amount that we h nced on percentage basis in ev ement should be at the rate of 1 We are disposed to hold so beca y in respect of those heads. *

*

* he income, an addition of 50% e of the deceased towards fut sed had a permanent job and w hould be made. The addition sho ceased was between 40 to 50 yea tween the age of 50 to 60 years, Actual salary should be read was self-employed (or) on a fix of the established income should ased was below the age of 40 yea he deceased was between the age here the deceased was between uld be regarded as the necess he established income means nent. the multiplicand, the deduction s, the tribunals and the courts sh

ave very 0% ause % of ture was ould ars. d as ixed d be ars. e of sary for

11.

Ho Company Limi 130] after cons settled the law r as under:-

be guided by paras 30 to 3 reproduced hereinbefore.

59.6. The selection of multi Table in Sarla Verma¹ read w

59.7. The age of the decease the multiplier.

59.8. Reasonable figures on estate, loss of consortium a 15,000, Rs 40,000 and Rs 1 amounts should be enhanced years." n'ble Supreme Court in the ca ited Vs. Nanu Ram alias Chuh sidering Sarla Verma (supra regarding consortium. Relevan "21. A Constitution Bench o with the various heads und awarded in a death case. consortium. In legal parlanc term which encompasses consortium", and "filial con would include the company solace and affection of the

32 of Sarla Verma which we h iplier shall be as indicated in with para 42 of that judgment. ed should be the basis for apply conventional heads, namely, loss and funeral expenses should be 15,000 respectively. The afores d at the rate of 10% in every th se of Magma General Insura hru Ram & Others [2018(18) S a) and Pranay Sethi (Supra) nt paras of the same are reprodu of this Court in Pranay Sethi² de der which compensation is to One of these heads is loss ce, "consortium" is a compendi "spousal consortium", "paren nsortium". The right to consorti y, care, help, comfort, guidan deceased, which is a loss to

ave ying s of Rs said hree nce CC has uced ealt be of ious ntal ium nce,

family. With respect to a relations with the deceased sp

21.1. Spousal consortium pertaining to the relationshi compensation to the surviv society, cooperation, affecti conjugal relation".

21.2. Parental consortium premature death of a pa protection, affection, soc training".

21.3. Filial consortium i compensation in the case of accident leading to the death agony to the parents and fa agony for a parent is to los Children are valued for the and their role in the family u

¶22Consortium is a special about the status and worth jurisdictions world-over hav child's consortium far exc compensation awarded in th jurisdictions therefore pe

spouse, it would include sex spouse. is generally defined as rig ip of a husband-wife which allo ving spouse for loss of "compa ion, and aid of the other in ev is granted to the child upon rent, for loss of "parental a ciety, discipline, guidance a is the right of the parents f an accidental death of a child. h of a child causes great shock a amily of the deceased. The grea se their child during their lifeti eir love, affection, companions unit. l prism reflecting changing nor h of actual relationships. Mod ve recognised that the value o ceeds the economic value of e case of the death of a child. M ermit parents to be award

xual ghts ows any, very aid, and to An and test me. ship rms dern of a Most

CONCLUSION

12.

In above referred

compensation under loss of c The amount awarded to the of the love, affection, care a child.

¶23The Motor Vehicles Act providing relief to the vict genuine claims. In case wh child, or unmarried son or d be awarded loss of conso consortium. Parental conso lose their parents in motor few High Courts have awa However, there was no clari which compensation could consortium.

¶24The amount of compensa will be governed by the pri under "loss of consortium" a present case, we deem it ap the sister of the deceased, an of filial consortium. N view of the law laid down by to judgments, the present app

consortium on the death of a ch parents is a compensation for l and companionship of the decea is a beneficial legislation aimed ims or their families, in cases here a parent has lost their mi daughter, the parents are entitled ortium under the head of fi rtium is awarded to children w vehicle accidents under the Act arded compensation on this cou ity with respect to the principles d be awarded on loss of fi ation to be awarded as consorti inciples of awarding compensat as laid down in Pranay Sethi². In ppropriate to award the father a n amount of Rs 40,000 each for l the Hon'ble Supreme Court in peal is allowed. The award da

hild. loss ased d at s of inor d to filial who t. A unt. s on ilial ium tion and loss

03.10.2005 is m enhanced compe Sr. No.

13.

So Court in Dara S and R.Valli and Supreme Cour 9% per annum o the date of its re

14.

In deposit the enha two months fro

modified accordingly. The ap ensation as per the calculations m Heads Monthly Income Future prospects @40% Deduction towards personal expenditure (1/2rd) Total Income Multiplier Annual Dependency Loss of Estate Funeral Expenses Loss of Consortium Filail : Rs.48,000/- x 2

Total Compensation Amount awarded by the Tribunal Enhanced amount far as the interest part is conce Singh @ Dhara Banjara Vs. Shy d Others VS. Tamil Nadu State rt Cases 107, the appellants-cla on the enhanced amount from th ealization. view of the above, respondent-anced amount of compensation w om the date of receipt of copy

ppellants-claimants are entitled made here-under:- Compensation Awarded Rs.2,100/- Rs.840/- (40% of 2100) Rs.1470/- [1/4 of 2940] Rs.1470/-(2940-735) Rs.3,17,520/- (1470 x 12 x 1 Rs.18,000/- Rs.18,000/- Rs.96,000/- Rs.4,49,520/- Rs.1,00,000/- Rs.3,49,520/- erned, as held by Hon'ble Supre yam Singh Varma 2019 ACJ 31 e Transport Corporation (2022 aimants are granted the interest he date of filing of claim petition -Insurance Company is directed with the Tribunal within a period of this judgment. The Tribuna

d to 7) eme 2) 5 t @ n till d to d of

further directed account of claim its award dated bank account de

15.

In

18.07.2024, the scheduled fees t date of receipt o

16.

Dis

17.

Pen

November 08, 2 tripti

Whethe

Whethe

to disburse the amount of comp mants/appellants as per the ratio

03.10.2005. The claimants/app etails to the Tribunal. view of the order passed in e insurance company is hereby to Mr. Gopal Mittal, Advocate w of copy of this judgment. sposed of accordingly. nding applications, if any, also st 2024

er speaking/non-speaking : Speak er reportable

: Yes/N

pensation along with interest in o settled by the learned Tribuna ellants are directed to furnish th n FAO No.1682 of 2007 da y directed to deposit the curr within a period of ten days from tand disposed of. (SUDEEPTI SHARMA) JUDGE king

al in heir ated