Santto and Ors v. Sant Baba Labh Singh Ji and Ors

SUDEEPTI SHARMA, J.

¶1The 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, whereby, the claimants/appellants were awarded a compensation of Rs.3,86,000/- along with interest @ 6% per annum. FACTS NOT IN DISPUTE

¶2Brief 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-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

following them p.m, when they Nurpur Bedi G 12B-5346 came driven by its dri speed and witho pass from Sham a result of whic the scooter fell died at the spo respondent No.2 aged 35 years, s on transportatio

21.9.2004 unde against responde

3.

Up the factum of ac

4.

Fro issues:- on another motor cycle alongw reached in the revenue limits of Garhshanker road, in the meanw e from Garhshanker side towar iver respondent No.2 in a rash a out blowing any horn. The drive m Sharma and Jatinder Sharma, h ch Geeta Sharma, her husband R on the pacca road and the offen ot. The accident took place due

2.It is alleged that at the time of self employed earning Rs.10,000 on, funeral and last rites of r sections 279,304-A, 427 IPC ent No. 2. on notice of the claim petition, ccident/compensation. om the pleadings of the parties, "1. Whether Geeta Sharma which was caused by resp Tempo No.PB-12B-5346 in

21.9.2004 At About 4.30 p. OPP

with Jatinder Sharma. At about 4 f Nalhoti, Tehsil Anandpur Sahib while Tata Tempo bearing No.P rds Nurpur Bedi which was be and negligent manner at a very h er of tempo in question after tak hit the scooter from the back side Ram Sharma and other occupant nding tempo crushed them and th e to rash and negligent driving death, deceased Geeta Sharma w 0/ p.m. and Rs.50,000/- were sp the deceased. FIR No.56 da C was recorded at PS Nurpur B , respondents appeared and den the Tribunal framed the follow a Died in motor vehicle accide pondent No.2 while driving T a rash and negligent manner m in the area of village Nalho

4.30 b on PB-eing high king e as t of hey g of was pent ated Bedi nied wing ent, Tata on oti?

5.

Aft record, the learn alongwith inter present appeal f SUBMISSIONS

6.

The amount assessed that the learned amount has bee estate. He furth lower side. He of the claimant assessed as 3/4th

7.

Per Tribunal vide compensation an

¶2Whether at the time of a holding a valid and effectiv OPR-3

¶3Whether the claim petition

¶4Whether the claimants are if so, to what extent and from

¶5Relief." ter taking into consideration th rned Tribunal awarded compens est @ 6% per annum. Hence for enhancement of compensation S OF THE COUNSELS FOR P e learned counsel for the claim d by the learned Tribunal is on t Tribunal erroneously applied m en granted for future prospects, her contends that the compensa further contends that tribunal ha ts/appellants to the extent of 2 h. r contra, learned for the resp award dated 22.07.2006 has nd, therefore, the appeal is liable

accident respondent No.2 was e driving licence? If so,its effec n is not maintainable? OPP e entitled to get any compensati m whom? OPP he pleadings and the evidence sation to the tune of Rs.3,86,00 the claimants/appellants filed n awarded by the Tribunal. PARTIES mants-appellants contends that the lower side. He further conte multiplier of 16 instead of 18 and loss of consortium and for loss ation for funeral expenses was as wrongly assessed the dependen 2/3rd whereas it should have b pondents argues that the learn rightly assessed the amount e to be dismissed.

not ct ? ion, on 00/- nds d no s of on ncy een ned

8.

I h record of this ca

9.

A p income of the Mathura Dutt v in which incom month. Howe consortium and on the lower sid SETTLED LAW

10.

Ho Transport Corp down the law o are as under:- "30 per ind stan dec was dep num whe have heard learned counsel for ase. perusal of the award indicates deceased at Rs.3000/- per m vs. DTC, 2005 (2) Accident Co me of the house wife was asse ever, no amount was calculat for loss of estate and the sum aw de. Therefore, the award requires 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

the parties and perused the wh that the Tribunal has assessed month relying upon the judgm ompensation Judicial Reports 3 essed to the tune of Rs.3000/- ted for future prospects, loss warded for funeral expenses is a indulgence of this Court. 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.

hole ment per of also 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. In 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

11.

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 e 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 xed d be ars. e of sary for

¶12Insuranc Others [2 Pranay S paras of th 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." Hon'ble Supreme Court in ce Company Limited Vs. Na 2018(18) SCC 130] after consi Sethi (Supra) has settled the law he same are reproduced as under "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 Verma⁴ 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 n the case of Magma Gene anu Ram alias Chuhru Ram dering Sarla Verma (supra) w regarding consortium. Relev r:- 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 eral & and vant 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 of 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

13.

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 ilial who t. A unt. s on ilial ium tion and loss

22.07.2006 is enhanced compe Sr. No. M F D ex

4. T M A L F L P F

T

A

E

14.

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

15.

The compensation al from today. The modified accordingly. The ap ensation as per the calculations m Heads Monthly Income uture prospects @ 40% Deduction towards pers xpenditure Total Income Multiplier Annual Dependency Loss of Estate uneral Expenses Loss of Consortium arental : Rs.48,000/- x 3 ilal: Rs.48,000/-x2 Total Compensation Amount Awarded by the Tribu Enhanced amount far as the interest part is conce Singh @ Dhara Banjara Vs. Shy d Others VS. Tamil Nandu State rt Cases 107, the appellants-cla on the enhanced amount from th ealization. e Insurance Company is directed long with interest with the Tribu e Tribunal is further directed to

- ppellants-claimants are entitled made here-under:- Compensation Awarded Rs.3000/- Rs.1200/- (40% of 3000) sonal Rs.1050/- [1/4 of (3000+1200)] Rs.3150/- (4200-1050) Rs.6,04,800/- (Rs.3150/- x 12 x 16) Rs.18,000/- Rs.18,000/- Rs.2,40,000/- Rs.8,80,800/- nal Rs.3,86,000/- Rs.4,94,800/- erned, as held by Hon'ble Supre yam Singh Varma 2019 ACJ 31 te Transport Corporation (2022 aimants are granted the interest he date of filing of claim petition d to deposit the enhanced amoun unal within a period of two mon o disburse the enhanced amount

d to d eme 2) 5 t @ n till nt of nths

compensation al ratio settled in t to furnish their b

16.

Dis

17.

Pen

07.11.2024 A.Kaundal

Whether s

Whether r long with interest in the account the award dated 22.07.2006. Th bank account details to the Tribu sposed of accordingly. nding applications, if any, also st

(

speaking/non-speaking : Speakin reportable

: Yes/No

- ts of the claimants/appellants as he claimants/appellants are direc unal. tand disposed of. (SUDEEPTI SHARMA) JUDGE ng

per

FAO-4704-2006 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 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 Go al, Advocate and Mr. Abhishek Go al, Advocate for respondent No.!-"ns. #o. -.-