The High Court allowed the appellants' appeal under Sn 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, directing the respondent owner to deposit an additional Rs. 80,000 as consolidated compensation for filial consortium to the deceased's parents.
Respondent owner to deposit Rs. 80,000 (consolidated filial consortium) within four weeks.
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.
HIGH COURT OF ORISSA : CUTTACK
MACA No.1072 of 2017
From an award dated 22.10.2016, passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-I, Baleswar, in M.A.C. Case No.470 of 2013.
Ramakanta Panda and another …. Appellants Versus
Sri Anil Sakore and another …. Respondents For Appellant … Mr. B. N. Rath, Advocate For Respondent … None no.1. For Respondent … Mr. S. K. Das, Advocate. no.2.
J U D G M E N T
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE A.K.RATH
Date of hearing and judgment : 08.03.2019
Dr. A.K.Rath, J. This is a claimants’ appeal under Section 173 (1)
of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, for enhancement of the compensation amount.
2. Jayshree Panda was travelling in a motorcycle bearing registration no.OR-01K-8269, as a pillion rider. Near
Narasinghpur Chhaka, a vehicle bearing registration No.V-1073
2
belongs to Defence Department came in a high speed from Basudevpur side, dashed against the motorcycle, as a result of which, she was thrown out of the motorcycle and the wheel of the offending vehicle ran over her. Immediately, she was shifted to Basudevpur Hospital, where she succumbed to the injuries. The matter was reported to the police, whereafter, Basudevpur P.S. Case No.331 of 2013 was registered. With the factual scenario, the parents of the deceased filed application u/s.166 of the Motor Vehicles Act claiming compensation of Rs.5,00,000/-.
3. The opposite party no.1-driver entered appearance and filed written statement denying the liability. The opposite party no.2-owner of the vehicle also filed written statement denying the liability.
4. Stemming on the pleadings of the parties, learned Tribunal struck four issues. Parties led evidence, oral and documentary. Learned Tribunal came to hold that due to rash and negligent driving by the driver of the offending vehicle bearing registration no.V-1073, the alleged accident occurred. Held so, it awarded Rs.5,02,000/- and directed the owner of the vehicle to pay the same along with interest @7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the claim application, i.e.28.12.2013.
3
5. Heard Mr. B.N. Rath, learned counsel for the
appellants and Mr. S.K. Das, learned counsel for the respondent no.2.
6. Mr. Rath, learned counsel for the appellants submits that learned Tribunal has committed manifest error in not awarding filial consortium.
7. Per contra, Mr. Das, learned counsel for the
respondent no.2 submits that the awarded amount has already been satisfied. He further submits that the claimants had not placed any materials before the learned Tribunal for award of compensation towards filial consortium.
8. In Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vrs. Nanu Ram alias Chuhru Ram and others , 2018 (4) T.A.C. 345 (SC), the apex Court went in-depth into the matter and held that 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.” 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
4
lifetime. Children are valued for their love, affection, companionship and their role in the family unit. Consortium is a special prism reflecting changing norms about the status and worth of actual relationships. Modern jurisdictions world over have cognized that the value of a child’s consortium far exceeds the economic value of the compensation awarded in the case of the death of a child. Most jurisdictions therefore permit parents to be awarded compensation under loss of consortium on the death of a child. The amount awarded to the parents is a compensation for loss of the love, affection, care and companionship of the deceased child. In the said case, Rs.80,000/- was awarded towards filial consortium to the parents.
9. In view of the authoritative pronouncement of this
Court in the case of Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. (supra), this Court is of the view that further an amount of Rs.80,000/(Rupees Eighty thousand)(consolidated) would suffice.
10. The respondent no.2 shall deposit an amount of Rs.80,000/- (Rupees Eighty thousand)(consolidated) before the learned Tribunal within a period of four weeks, whereafter the same shall be disbursed to the claimants-respondent nos.1 & 2.
5
11. The appeal is allowed to the extent indicated above.
No costs.
……………………….. DR. A.K.RATH, J
Orissa High Court, Cuttack. Dated the 8th March, 2019/Uks
2 issues framed by the court
Whether filial consortium should be awarded to the parents of a deceased child in a motor accident claim.
Whether the amount awarded for filial consortium is sufficient in light of Supreme Court precedents.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd.Explained¶26
Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vrs. Nanu Ram alias Chuhru Ram and others, 2018 (4) T.A.C. 345 (SC)
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Ramakanta Panda
Sri Anil Sakore
A.K.Rath
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
