High Court enhanced compensation in a motor vehicle accident death case. Court distinguished Shri Ram General Insurance and relied on Pranay Sethi and Magma Insurance to award Rs.40,000 each for loss of consortium and corrected conventional heads.
Enhanced compensation of Rs.5,69,200 granted along with interest at 6% p.a. over Tribunal award.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.I.ARUN MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 5134 OF 2021 (MV-D)
BETWEEN:
…APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. RAGHU R., ADVOCATE)
AND:
GIRIJA A BYAHATTI
Digitally signed by GIRIJA A BYAHATTI
BANGALORE-79.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. MANJULA N. TEJASHWI, ADV. FOR R2)
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173 (1) MOTOR VEHICLES ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 06.03.2021 PASSED IN MVC NO.7807/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE COURT OF THE MEMBER, MOTOR VEHICLES ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, XVI ADDITIONAL JUDGE, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, BENGALURU CITY (SCCH-14), PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
NC: 2023:KHC:45640 MFA No. 5134 of 2021
THIS APPEAL HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED FOR JUDGMENT ON 05.10.2023, COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT OF JUDGMENT THIS DAY THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
On 14.10.2018, at about 8.30 p.m., the deceased Chetan was proceeding as a pillion rider in a motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-02/HM-6122 and when he reached near Lupith Daba, Mallipalya, Kunigal Town, the rider of the motorcycle drove it in a rash and negligent manner, because of which the motorcycle fell down and the said Chetan sustained
grievous injuries and because of which he died on 17.10.2018. The petitioners are his parents. The accident happened due to the rash and negligent driving of the motorcycle, which was duly insured with respondent No.2/Insurance Company. The Tribunal has awarded a compensation of Rs.14,44,700/- along with interest at the rate of 7% p.a. from the date of petition till its realization. Not satisfied by the same, the petitioners have preferred this appeal.
laid down by the Apex Court in SARLA VERMA & OTHERS V. DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION &
ANOTHER reported in (2009) 6 SCC 121. As the deceased was a bachelor, 50% of his income needs to be deducted towards his personal expenses. As per the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court
in NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. V. PRANAY SETHI AND OTHERS reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680, 40% of the income of the deceased has to be added towards future prospects. Thus, on the count of ‘loss of dependency’, petitioners are entitled to a
sum of Rs.18,90,000/- (Rs.12,500 X 12 X 18 X ½
(supra), MAGMA GENERAL INSURANCE CO.LTD., VS. NANU RAM ALIAS CHUHRU RAM AND OTHERS reported in (2018) 18 SCC 130 and RAHUL GANAPATRAO SABLE VS. LAXMAN MARUTI JADHAV (DEAD) THROUGH LRS AND OTHERS, passed in SLP(C) No.26871 of 2019 and SLP(C) No.27394 of 2019 and submit that together they are entitled to a sum of Rs.80,000/under this head.
NC: 2023:KHC:45640 MFA No. 5134 of 2021
8. Paragraphs 46 and 59.8 of the judgment in Pranay
Sethi (supra) reads as under:
NC: 2023:KHC:45640 MFA No. 5134 of 2021
regard. We quote: [Rajesh v. Rajbir Singh (2013) 9 SCC 54, para 17]
“17. … In legal parlance, “consortium” is the right of the spouse to the company, care, help, comfort, guidance, society, solace, affection and sexual relations with his or her mate. That non-pecuniary head of damages has not been properly understood by our courts. The loss of companionship, love, care and protection, etc., the spouse is entitled to get, has to be compensated appropriately. The concept of nonpecuniary damage for loss of consortium is one of the major heads of award of compensation in other parts of the world more particularly in the United States of America, Australia, etc. English courts have also recognised the right of a spouse to get compensation even during the period of temporary disablement. By loss of consortium, the courts have made an attempt to compensate the loss of spouse's affection, comfort, solace, companionship, society, assistance, protection, care and sexual relations during the future years. Unlike the compensation awarded in other countries and other jurisdictions, since the legal heirs are otherwise adequately compensated for the pecuniary loss, it would not be proper to award a major amount under this head. Hence, we are of the view that it would only be just and reasonable that the courts award at least rupees one lakh for loss of consortium.”
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
NC: 2023:KHC:45640 MFA No. 5134 of 2021
should be enhanced at the rate of 10% in every three years.”
9. Paragraphs 21 to 24 of the judgment in Magma General Insurance Co. (supra) reads as under:
21.1. Spousal consortium is generally defined as rights pertaining to the relationship of a husbandwife which allows compensation to the surviving spouse for loss of “company, society, cooperation, affection, and aid of the other in every 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”.
NC: 2023:KHC:45640 MFA No. 5134 of 2021
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.
awarded compensation on this count. However, there was no clarity with respect to the principles on which compensation could be awarded on loss of filial consortium.
10. Paragraph 33 of the judgment in Rahul Ganapatrao
Sable (supra) reads as under:
NC: 2023:KHC:45640 MFA No. 5134 of 2021
11. The judgment in Shri Ram General Insurance
Co.(supra) reads as under:
(1.) Leave granted.
(2.) Heard learned counsel for parties.
(3.) The notice in terms of the order dtd. 13/10/2020 was confined only to two aspects i.e. the sum for loss of love and affection being Rs.50,000.00 and for loss of consortium for Rs. 40,000.00 could not have been granted to each of the three dependents separately but in toto and that would be the amount quantified. This was in terms of the judgment in National Insurance Company Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi & Ors - (2017) 16 SCC 680.
(4.) We have heard learned counsel for parties. Learned counsel for the respondents did endeavour to persuade us that it should be per the legal heir by relying on Magma General Insurance Company Ltd. v. Nanu Ram Alias Chuhru Ram & Ors.-2018 SCC OnLine SC 1546.
(5.) We are, however, of the view that the total amount has to be assigned under a particular heading and that will go depending on the number of legal heirs present.
(6.) The amounts fixed in terms of Pranay Sethi's case (supra) are Rs.50,000.00 and Rs.40,000.00 respectively under the two heads and that should be the total amount payable.
NC: 2023:KHC:45640 MFA No. 5134 of 2021
(7.) Having said so, learned counsel for the respondent points out that this amount so determined by us is liable to be enhanced by a percentage of 10 per cent every three years as opined in para 61 (viii) of the judgment in Pranay Sethi's case (supra) which reads as under:
"61(viii) Reasonable figures on conventional heads, namely, loss of estate, loss of consortium and funeral expenses should be Rs.15,000.00 Rs.40,000.00 and Rs.15,000.00 respectively.
The aforesaid amounts should be enhanced at the rate of 10% in every three years."
(8.) The aforesaid position is not disputed by learned counsel for the appellant.
(9.) Thus, this escalation on account of interest would also to be admissible for the benefit of the respondents from the date of the Award which will mean that in the present case there will be two escalations of 10 per cent each.
(10.) The impugned judgment is modified to the aforesaid extent.
(11.) The appellant to deposit the balance amount within four weeks from today with the Tribunal.
(12.) The appeals stand allowed.
SLP(C) No. 1185-1186/2021
(13.) We are not inclined to interfere with the impugned order(s) on ground raised.
(14.) The Special Leave Petitions are dismissed.
ORDER
1.SLP [C] NOS.11669-11671/2020
2.Leave granted.
3.The appeals are allowed in terms of the signed order.
4.Pending application, if any, stands disposed of. SLP(C) No.1185-1186/2021
5.The Special Leave Petitions are dismissed in terms of the signed order.
6.Pending application, if any, stands disposed of.
Apex Court has not stated, in those many words, that each of the petitioners are entitled to compensation under the head ‘loss of consortium’, to an extent of Rs.40,000/-, the same has been explained in the case of Magma Insurance Co. (supra) and Rahul Ganapatrao Sable (supra). In the said cases, the Hon’ble Apex Court has held that, each of the person, who is entitled to compensation
NC: 2023:KHC:45640 MFA No. 5134 of 2021
as a relative of the deceased, is entitled to a sum of
Rs.40,000/- towards ‘loss of consortium’.
table below:
| Sl. No. |
Compensation towards |
Amount awarded by the Tribunal |
Amount awarded by this Court |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. | Loss of dependency |
Rs.13,60,800.00 | Rs.18,90,000.00 |
| 2. | Medical expenses | Rs.13,885.00 | Rs. 13,885.00 |
| 3. | Transportation of dead body and Funeral expenses |
Rs.15,000.00 | Rs.15,000.00 |
| 4. | Filial consortium | Rs.40,000.00 | Rs.80,000.00 |
| 5. | Loss of estate | Rs.15,000.00 | Rs.15,000.00 |
| Total | Rs.14,44,685.00 | Rs.20,13,885.00 |
enhanced compensation from the date of petition till
realization.
ORDER
Sd/JUDGE
gab
List No.: 19 Sl No.: 1
2 issues framed by the court
Whether parents are entitled to separate compensation of Rs.40,000 each for loss of consortium upon the death of their unmarried son.
Whether the loss of estate, loss of consortium and funeral expenses should be fixed at Rs.15,000, Rs.40,000 and Rs.15,000 respectively under Pranay Sethi.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transport CorporationFollowed¶4
Sarla Verma & Others v. Delhi Transport Corporation & Another (2009) 6 SCC 121 · Who else cites this
National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay SethiDistinguished¶4
National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi and Others (2017) 16 SCC 680 · Who else cites this
Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nanu Ram Alias Chuhru RamRelied on¶9
Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nanu Ram Alias Chuhru Ram and Others (2018) 18 SCC 130 · Who else cites this
Rahul Ganapatrao SableRelied on¶10
Rahul Ganapatrao Sable vs. Laxman Maruti Jadhav (Dead) (2019) SLPC 26871/27394
Shri Ram General Insurance Co.Dissented from¶13
Shri Ram General Insurance Company Limited v. Bhagat Singh Rawat
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Lakshmamma W/O. Rajanna
Rajanna S/O. Gangaiah
Rangaswamy S/O. Adisheshamurthy
The Manager, United India Insurance Co. Ltd.
M.I. Arun
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
