Surjit Kaur and Ors v. Inderpal Singh and Ors

IN T

Smt. Surjit Kaur

Inderpal Singh a

CORAM : HO

Present : Mr

Mr SUDEEPTI SH

1.

The enhancement of Tribunal, Gurda Section 163-A o were awarded a FACTS NOT IN

2.

On at a distance of registration No. negligently by Dass, who fell d head injury. Sa referred to Civi

THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJ AT CHANDIGA -.-

FAO N

XOBJ

Date o r and others

Versus and others

ON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUDE

r. Vipin Mahajan, Advocate for th r.Paul S. Saini, Advocate, for the -.- HARMA, J. (Oral)

e present appeal has been prefer f compensation awarded by th aspur (for short, 'the Tribunal') v of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1989 compensation of Rs.96,000/- alo N DISPUTE n 11.07.2003, Sain Dass was goin f 100 meters from village Rarra PB-54-9009 came from behind respondent No.1, without blow down from his bicycle on the pu ain Dass was admitted in Civil H l Hospital, Hoshiarpur. At 11.3

JAB AND HARYANA ARH No. 5418 of 2006 and J – 20 – CII - 2008 of decision : August 09, 2024

...... Appellants

...... Respondents EEPTI SHARMA

the appellants. e Insurance Company. rred by the claimants/appellants he learned Motor Accident Cla vide award dated 01.09.2006 un 9, whereby the claimants/appella ong with interest @ 6% per annu ng to his shop on a bicycle. He w Turn, then one motorcycle bear which was being driven rashly wing horn and struck against S ucca road and had received griev Hospital, Tanda from where he w 30 PM Sain Dass succumbed to

for ims nder ants um. was ring Sain vous was

injuries while l stated to be 55 y as a shopkeeper

3.

On factum of comp

4.

Fro issues:-

5.

Aft record, the lear alongwith inter present appeal f

lying admitted in Civil Hospita years old at time of his death and r. n notice of the claim petition, re ensation. om the pleading of the parties,

¶1Whether on 11.07.200 Village Miani, there was an driving of motorcycle No.PB in that accident Sain Dass ha

¶2Whether the claimant were dependent upon the dec

¶3Whether the claimant and, if so, how much and fro

¶4Whether the petition is

¶5Whether the driver of valid and effective driving accident? OPR

¶6Relief. ter taking into consideration th rned Tribunal awarded compen est @ 6% per annum. Hence for enhancement of compensation

al, Hoshiarpur. The deceased w d was earning Rs.6,000/- per mo spondents appeared and denied the Tribunal framed the follow 03 at about 3:30 PM in the area accident due to rash and neglig B-54-9009 by respondent No.1 ad died? OPP ts are the legal representatives ceased? OPP ts are entitled to the compensat om whom? OPP s not maintainable? OPR. f the motorcycle was not holdin g licence at the time of alle he pleadings and the evidence nsation to the tune of Rs.96,00 the claimants/appellants filed n awarded by the Tribunal.

was onth wing a of gent tion ng a ged on 00/-

SUBMISSIONS

6.

Lea compensation g contends that th which is lower t be minimum R been taken to be in Sarla Verm Supreme Cour was awarded tow

7.

Per argued on the l rightly granted t of the Motor Ve Schedule is Rs.9

8.

I h record of this ca

9.

A p has taken the inc for personal exp Further the age multiplier of 5, Rs.96,000/-.

S OF THE COUNSELS arned counsel for the appella granted by the learned Tribunal he income of the deceased has b than that of daily wage labourer. s.3,000/- per month. He furthe e 5 whereas as per the latest law ma Vs. Delhi Transport Corp t Cases 121], it has to be 11. H wards funeral expenses and loss r contra, learned counsel for th lines of the award and contend to be Rs.96,000/- since the petit ehicles Act,1988 and the maximu 95,000/- under the conventional have heard learned counsel for ase. perusal of the award dated 01.0 come of the deceased as Rs.2400 penses, the annual dependency e of deceased was taken as 5 thereby assessed total compensa

ants contend that the amount l is on the lower side. He furt been taken as Rs.2400/- per mo . He, therefore, prays that it sho er contends that the multiplier w laid down in the judgment pas poration and Another [(2009) He further contends that no amo of consortium. he Insurance Company vehemen ds that the compensation has b tion was filed under Section 163 um amount to be granted as per head. the parties and perused the wh

09.2006 indicates that the Tribu 0/- per month. After deducting 1 was determined to be Rs.19,20 5 years and the Tribunal appl ation payable to the claimants to

of ther onth ould has ssed ) 6 ount ntly een 3-A hole unal /3rd 00/-. lied

SETTLED LAW

10.

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

¶31par bac exp mo get par to e be

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 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

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. 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

elhi laid ame ards nits pply uent ased s of r of 5th) d to ving end f his ject ome

con bec be only wou of t as you exp wil *

¶42men Sus an 25 y to 3 for uni to 6

11.

Ho Ltd. Vs. Pranay

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.

*

* 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

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 *

*

* 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

nts, , or ngs, 50% elor mily sed, r of ving mily e as ying with 1 to r 26 M-14 two r 56 pany

Sections 166, 1 aspects:-

(A) mu

(B)

(C)

(D) esta

(E) age The

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 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

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 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

wing mine of rent find has s of loss fers The t be e an said ve a fact s in

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 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

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 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,

this in ied, ncy nals k it able s of 000, of hink ave very 0% ause % of ture was ould

¶12Insuranc

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 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

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 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

d as ixed d be ars. e of sary for hall ave ying s of Rs said hree eral &

Others [2 Pranay S paras of th

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 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

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 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

vant ealt be of ious ntal ium nce, his xual ghts ows any, very aid, to

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 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 victi 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.

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 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

test me. ship rms dern of a Most ded hild. loss ased d at s of inor d to filial who t. A unt. s on

13.

Ho Kishore Murm "12 has dut Veh dire app cos dire Rs. non Rs. ear

¶13tha Veh inc

14.

¶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'ble Apex Court in Kurvan A mu, [2022 (1) SCC 317] held as u

¶2In the judgment in the case s observed that the Central Go ties to amend Schedule-II in view hicles Act 1988, but it failed to d ections were issued to the propriate amendments to Sched st of living. In the said judgmen ections were issued for award o 1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh on n-earning children up to the age 1,50,000/- (Rupees one lakh f rning persons of more than 5 (fiv

In the case of R.K. Malik & A at the notional income fixed u hicles Act, 1988 as Rs.15,000/- p creased as the same continued to

11.1994. In the case of Kishan G

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 nsari Alias Kurvan Ali vs Shy under :- e of Puttamma & Ors.1, this Co overnment was bestowed with w of Section 163-A(3) of the Mo do so. In view of the same, spec Central Government to m dule-II keeping in mind the pres nt, till such amendments are ma of compensation by fixing a sum nly) towards compensation for e of 5 (five) years old and a sum fifty thousand only) for the n ve) years old. Anr.2 also, this Court has obser under Section 163-A of the Mo per annum should be enhanced a exist without any amendment si Gopal & Anr.3 where the decea

ium tion loss yam ourt otor cific ake sent ade, m of m of non-rved otor ince

was Rs.

14.

¶06am for

¶15R.K tha acc view reli Com com

¶16inc only wit cla to dep eac exp tow

s a ten years old child, this Cou 30,000/- per annum.

In this case, it is to be

09.2004. In spite of repeated ended. Therefore, fixing notiona non-earning members is not jus

In view of the judgments in K. Malik & Anr.2 and Kishan G at it is a fit case to increase th count the inflation, devaluation w ofthe same, the judgment in th ied on by the learned counse mpany would not render any ass mpany. In view of the above, we dee come of the deceased at Rs.25,0 ly) per annum. Accordingly, whe th applicable multiplier '15', as ims under Section 163-A of the Rs.3,75,000/- (Rs.25,000/- x pendency. The appellants are al ch towards filial consortium penses. Thus, the appellants are wards compensation:

urt has fixed his notional income noted that the accident was directions, Schedule-II is not al income at Rs.15,000/- per ann st and reasonable. n the cases in Puttamma & Or Gopal & Anr.3, we are of the v he notional income by taking i of the rupee and cost of living he case of Rajendra Singh & Or el for respondent No.2-Insura sistance to the case of the insura em it appropriate to take notio 000/- (Rupees twenty five thousa en the notional income is multipl s prescribed in Schedule-II for Motor Vehicles Act 1988, it com Multiplier 15) towards loss lso entitled to a sum of Rs.40,00 and Rs.15,000/- towards fune e entitled to the following amou

e at on yet num rs.1, view into . In rs.4 nce nce onal lied mes of 00/- eral

CONCLUSION

14.

In above referred

01.09.2006 is m enhanced compe Sr. No. M F D ex

4. T A M L F L P S

T

A

E

15.

So Court in Dara S

(a) Loss of Dependenc

(b) Filial Consortium

(c) Funeral Expenses

Total

: N view of the law laid down by to judgments, the present app modified accordingly. The ap ensation as per the calculations m Heads Monthly Income uture prospects @ 10% Deduction towards pers xpenditure Total Income Annual Dependency Multiplier 11 Loss of Estate uneral Expenses Loss of Consortium arental : Rs.48,000/- pousal : Rs. 48,000/- Total Compensation Amount Awarded by the Tribu Enhanced amount far as the interest part is conce Singh @ Dhara Banjara Vs. Shy

cy : Rs. 3,75,000-00 : Rs. 80,000-00 (Rs.40,000/- x 2) : Rs. 15,000-00 ---------------- Rs. 4,70,000-00" the Hon'ble Supreme Court in peal is allowed. The award da ppellants-claimants are entitled made here-under:- Compensation Awarded Rs.3,000/- Rs.300/- (10% of 3000) sonal Rs.1100/- [1/3rd of (3000+300)] Rs.2200 (3300-1100) Rs 26,400/- Rs.2,90,400/- (26,400 x 11 Rs.18,000/- Rs.18,000/- Rs.96,000/- Rs.4,22,400/- nal Rs.96,000/- Rs.3,26,400/- erned, as held by Hon'ble Supre yam Singh Varma 2019 ACJ 31

) ated d to d 1)

and R.Valli and Supreme Cour per annum on th date of its realiz

16.

The compensation al from today. The compensation al per ratio settled directed to furni

17.

As no.5 in favour o holding a valid was directed to insurance comp deposit the enha and liberty is gra

18.

Pen of.

August 09, 2024 tripti

Whethe

Whethe

d Others VS. Tamil Nandu State t Cases 107, the appellants-claim he enhanced amount from the da zation. e Insurance Company is directed long with interest with the Tribu e Tribunal is further directed to long with interest in the accoun d in the award dated 01.09.20 ish the bank account details to th per award dated 01.09.2006, t of the insurance company, since driving licence at the time of deposit the compensation, but pany. In view of the same, the anced amount of compensation a anted to recover the same. nding applications, if any, and c

er speaking/non-speaking : Speak er reportable

: Yes/N

te Transport Corporation (2022 mants are granted the interest @ ate of filing of claim petition till d to deposit the enhanced amoun unal within a period of two mon o disburse the enhanced amount nts of all the claimants/appellants

¶006The claimants/appellants he Tribunal. the learned Tribunal decided is e driver (respondent No.1) was accident. The insurance comp recovery rights were given to e insurance company is directed alongwith interest with the Tribu cross-objections also stand dispo (SUDEEPTI SHARMA) JUDGE king

2) 5 @9% nt of nths t of s as are ssue not any d to unal