Allowed

Jasbir Singh and Anr. v. Surjit Singh and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC8 Nov 2024FAO/1292/2006

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Enhancement of motor accident compensation for death of a housewife claimant. Tribunal had assessed monthly income at Rs.2,100 and used multiplier 5. High Court took housewife's income as Rs.9,000 per month citing its own precedent orders, applied multiplier 18, added future prospects, loss of estate, funeral expenses and consortium, enhancing compensation to Rs.19,46,400.

What did the court decide?

Compensation enhanced by Rs.18,50,400 to Rs.19,46,400 total, payable at 9% p.a. interest from filing date; insurance company directed to deposit within two months, retaining recovery rights.

Jasbir Singh and Anr. Vs Surjit Singh and Ors. — Motor Accident Claims | Punjab & Haryana HC (2024)

¶1

FAO-1292-2006 (O&M)

¶2

- 1-

¶3

204 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

-.-

¶5

FAO-1292-2006 (O&M) Date of Decision : 08.11.2024

¶6

Jasbir Singh an d Another

¶7

....Appellants

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

Surjit Singh & others

¶10

....Respondents

¶11

CORAM : HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA

¶12

Present: M r . Gurcharan Dass, Advocate for the appellants.

¶13

M r . Neeraj Khanna, Advocate for M r . Ravinder Arora, Advocate Fo r respondent No.3 – Insurance C o.

¶14

-.-

¶15

SUDEEPTI SHARMA, J. (Oral)

¶16

Th e present appeal has been pref e rred by the claimant/appellant for enhancement o f compensation awarded by t h e learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ludh i ana (for short, 'the Tribunal') v ide award dated 11.10.2005 u n der Section 166 of t he Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, w hereby the claimant/appellant w ere awarded a com p ensation of Rs.96,000/- alongw i th interest @ 7.5% per annum.

¶17

Si n ce the factum of the accident is not in dispute, the facts are not being adverted t o for the sake of brevity.

¶18

SUBMISSIONS OF LEARNED COUNSELS FOR THE PARTIES

¶19

Le a rned counsel for the claiman t s-appellants contends that am o unt assessed by the learned Tribunal is on the lower side. Learned counsel for appellant furth e r contends that the learned Tr i bunal has erred in taking mon t hly income of wife as Rs.2,100/- per month. He fu r ther submits that the deceased w as

¶20

TRIPTI SAINI 2024.12.04 15:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶21

FAO-1292-2006 (O&M) - 2-

¶22

house-wife an d income must be taken as Rs.9,000/- PM. In support of his submission, he h as placed reliance on the judg m ents rendered in FAO No. 218 of 2014, United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Sube Singh and Others , decide d on January 15, 2014, and FAO No. 2772 of 2015, Tarsem Singh and Others v. M/s New India Assurance Co. Ltd. and Others , decided on August 22, 2017 , to contend that th e monthly income should be a s sessed at Rs.9,000. In both ca s es, coordinate benches have consistently adjud i cated the monthly income of a deceased hous e wife in motor vehicle accid e nt cases at Rs.9,000. He fur t her submits that th e learned Tribunal has wrongly t aken multiplier of 5 instead of 18, as per settled la w . Moreover, no amount for fu t ure prospects and loss of estate has been awarded a nd even the amount awarded for funeral expenses and los s of consortium is o n the lower side. He, theref o re, prays that the income of the housewife in t h e present case be taken as Rs. 9 ,000/- per month . Therefore , he prays that the present appeal be allowed an d the amount of compensation be enhanced.

¶23

Pe r contra, learned for the respond e nt-Insurance Company argues t hat the learned Tri b unal vide award dated 11.10.2 0 05 has rightly assessed the am o unt of compensatio n . Therefore, he prays for dismi s sal of the present appeal. 5. I h ave heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the w h ole record of this c a se. 6. In FAO No. 218 of 2014 , a co-o r dinate Bench of this Court, w h ile relying upon t h e principles laid down in Lata Wadhwa and others v. State of Bihar and others [2001(4) RCR(Civil) 673] , m a de the following observations:-

¶24

TRIPTI SAINI 2024.12.04 15:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶25

FAO-1292-2006 (O&M) - 3-

¶26

“L e arned counsel for the appel l ant has argued that even w h ile no t icing that the income of a skilled worker in 2012 w as ap p roximately Rs.8000/- the Tr i bunal has wrongly assessed the in c ome of the deceased as Rs.90 0 0/-. As per him once the noti o nal in c ome had been taken a deduc t ion had to be made for pers o nal ex p enses. This argument is flawe d . In Lata Wadhwa and others v. State of Bihar and others reporte d as 2001(4) RCR(Civil) 673 (w h ere th e accident had taken place in 1 981) the Hon'ble Supreme C o urt ev a luated the contribution of a ho u se wife at Rs.3000/-per month. T he ac c ident in the present case took place after 23 years. In my co n sidered opinion to tag a hou s e wife as a 'skilled worker' al o ne do e s not do complete justice to her multifarious role as a h o me manager. Keeping in view the lap s e of 23 years between the acci d ent in the case of Lata Wadhwa and the present accident and my co n clusion that a house wife is s o mething more than a mere ski l led wo r ker it would not be unreason a ble to estimate the contributio n of th e deceased in the present case at a higher figure. On the whole I see no reason for reducing the quantu m .”

¶27

I find sufficient reason to follo w the judgment in FAO No. 21 8 of 2014, particula r ly as I am informed that the S pecial Leave Petition (SLP) fi led against the ord e r in this case has been dismiss e d by the Hon’ble Supreme C o urt. Similarly, the S LP filed in the other case cited by the appellants has also met the same fate. Con s equently, these orders have att a ined finality, leaving no scope for further dispute r egarding their binding nature. TRIPTI SAINI 2024.12.04 15:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶28

FAO-1292-2006 (O&M) - 4-

¶29

It i s imperative to acknowledge t h e multifaceted role of a house w ife as a homema k er. Her contributions extend beyond measurable econo m ic parameters, en c ompassing household manage m ent, child care, emotional sup p ort, and the upkeep of familial stability. These ser v ices, though often unrecognize d in monetary terms, are invaluable to the function i ng and well-being of a househ o ld. In assessing co m pensation, the court must factor in this indispensable contribut i on, which would ot h erwise necessitate considerabl e expenditure if outsourced. In v i ew of the above, i t is just and reasonable to det e rmine the monthly income of the deceased – Ch a ranjit Kaur, housewife at Rs . 9,000/- per month, therefore, the award requires i nterference by this Court.

¶30

A p erusal of the award further sho w s that no amount of compensa t ion was granted for future prospects and for loss o f estate. Award further reveals t hat the learned Tri b unal has erred in applying the m ultiplier of 5 instead of 18, as per the settled law. A perusal of the award further shows that the amount granted for funeral expens e s and for loss of consortium is on the lower side. Therefore, the award requires i ndulgence of this Court.

¶31

SETTLED LAW ON COMPENSATION

¶32

Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sarla Verma Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and Another [(2009) 6 Supreme Court Cases 121] , l aid down the law o n assessment of compensation and the relevant paras of the s a me are as under:-

¶33

“ 30 . Though in some cases th e deduction to be made tow a rds pe r sonal and living expenses is calculated on the basis of u n its

¶34

TRIPTI SAINI 2024.12.04 15:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶35

FAO-1292-2006 (O&M) - 5-

¶36

in d icated in Trilok Chandra, t h e general practice is to a p ply sta n dardised deductions. Having a considered several subseq u ent de c isions of this Court, we are o f the view that where the dece a sed wa s married, the deduction towar d s personal and living expense s of th e deceased, should be one-thi r d (1/3rd) where the numbe r of de p endent family members is 2 t o 3, one-fourth (1/4th) where the nu m ber of dependent family mem b ers is 4 to 6, and one-fifth (1/ 5 th) wh e re the number of dependent fa m ily members exceeds six.

¶37

31 . Where the deceased was a b a chelor and the claimants are the pa r ents, the deduction follows a different principle. In regar d to ba c helors, normally, 50% is d educted as personal and li v ing ex p enses, because it is assumed t h at a bachelor would tend to spend more on himself. Even otherwise, there is also the possibility o f his ge t ting married in a short time, in which event the contribution to the pa r ent(s) and siblings is likely to b e cut drastically. Further, sub j ect to e vidence to the contrary, the fat h er is likely to have his own inc o me an d will not be considered as a d e pendant and the mother alone w ill be considered as a dependant. In the absence of evidence to the co n trary, brothers and sisters wil l not be considered as dependants, be c ause they will either be indep e ndent and earning, or married , or be dependent on the father.

¶38

32 . Thus even if the deceased is survived by parents and sibli n gs, on ly d the mother would be consi d ered to be a dependant, and 5 0%

¶39

TRIPTI SAINI 2024.12.04 15:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶40

FAO-1292-2006 (O&M) - 6-

¶41

wo u ld be treated as the personal a nd living expenses of the bach e lor an d 50% as the contribution to th e family. However, where the fa m ily of t he bachelor is large and depen d ent on the income of the decea s ed, as in a case where he has a wid o wed mother and large numbe r of yo u nger non-earning sisters or b rothers, his personal and li v ing ex p enses may be restricted to one- t hird and contribution to the fa m ily wi l l be taken as two-third.

¶42

42. We therefore hold that the m ultiplier to be used should b e as me n tioned in Column (4) of the t able above (prepared by appl y ing Su s amma Thomas³, Trilok Chand r a and Charlie), which starts w ith an operative multiplier of 18 (for t h e age groups of 15 to 20 and 2 1 to 25 y ears), reduced by one unit for e very five years, that is M-17 fo r 26 to 3 0 years, M-16 for 31 to 35 ye a rs, M-15 for 36 to 40 years, M -14 for 41 to 45 years, and M-13 for 4 6 to 50 years, then reduced by two un i ts for every five years, that is, M -11 for 51 to 55 years, M-9 fo r 56 to 6 0 years, M-7 for 61 to 65 years and M-5 for 66 to 70 years.

¶43

Hon’ble Supreme Court in the cas e of National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi & Ors. [(2017) 16 SCC 680] has clarified the law u n der Sections 166, 163-A and 168 of the Motor V e hicles Act, 1988, on the follo w ing aspects:-

¶44

(A ) Deduction of personal a n d living expenses to deter m ine m u ltiplicand;

¶45

TRIPTI SAINI 2024.12.04 15:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶46

FAO-1292-2006 (O&M) - 7-

¶47

(B ) Selection of multiplier depe n ding on age of deceased;

¶48

(C ) Age of deceased on basis fo r applying multiplier;

¶49

(D ) Reasonable figures on co n ventional heads, namely, loss of est a te, loss of consortium and fune r al expenses, with escalation;

¶50

(E ) Future prospects for all cat e gories of persons and for diffe r ent ag e s: with permanent job; self-em p loyed or fixed salary. Th e relevant portion of the judgme n t is reproduced as under:-

¶51

“ 52. As far as the conventional heads are concerned, we f ind it difficult to agree with th e view expressed in Rajesh². It has granted Rs.25,000 toward s funeral expenses, Rs 1,00, 0 00 towards loss of consortium and Rs 1,00,000 towards los s of care and guidance for mino r children. The head relating to l oss of care and minor children d oes not exist. Though Rajesh re f ers to Santosh Devi, it does n ot seem to follow the same. T he conventional and traditiona l heads, needless to say, canno t be determined on percentage b asis because that would not b e an acceptable criterion. Unlik e determination of income, the s aid heads have to be quantifie d . Any quantification must ha v e a reasonable foundation. The r e can be no dispute over the f act that price index, fall in bank interest, escalation of rate s in many a field have to be n oticed. The court cannot re m ain oblivious to the same. The r e has been a thumb rule in t his aspect. Otherwise, there will be extreme difficulty in determination of the same a n d unless the thumb rule is appl i ed,

¶52

TRIPTI SAINI 2024.12.04 15:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶53

FAO-1292-2006 (O&M) - 8-

¶54

there will be immense varia t ion lacking any kind of consistency as a consequence of which, the orders passed by the tribu n als and courts are likely to b e unguided. Therefore, we thin k it seemly to fix reasonable su m s. It seems to us that reason a ble figures on conventional he a ds, namely, loss of estate, los s of consortium and funeral expenses should be Rs.15, 0 00, Rs.40,000 and Rs.15,000 respectively. The principle of revisiting the said heads i s an acceptable principle. But the revisit should not be fact-ce n tric or quantum-centric. We t h ink that it would be condign that the amount that we have quantified should be enha n ced on percentage basis in e v ery three years and the enhanc e ment should be at the rate of 10% in a span of three years. W e are disposed to hold so bec a use that will bring in consistenc y in respect of those heads.

¶55

59.3 . While determining t h e income, an addition of 50 % of actual salary to the income of the deceased towards fu t ure prospects, where the decea s ed had a permanent job and w as below the age of 40 years, s h ould be made. The addition sh o uld be 30%, if the age of the de c eased was between 40 to 50 ye a rs. In case the deceased was be t ween the age of 50 to 60 years, the addition should be 15%. Actual salary should be rea d as actual salary less tax.

¶56

TRIPTI SAINI 2024.12.04 15:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶57

FAO-1292-2006 (O&M) - 9-

¶58

59.4 . In case the deceased was self-employed (or) on a f ix ed salary, an addition of 40% o f the established income shoul d be the warrant where the dece a sed was below the age of 40 ye a rs. An addition of 25% where t h e deceased was between the ag e of 40 to 50 years and 10% w h ere the deceased was between the age of 50 to 60 years sho u ld be regarded as the neces s ary method of computation. T h e established income means the income minus the tax compo n ent.

¶59

59.5 . For determination of t he multiplicand, the deduction for personal and living expense s , the tribunals and the courts s h all be guided by paras 30 to 3 2 of Sarla Verma which we have reproduced hereinbefore.

¶60

59.6. The selection of mult i plier shall be as indicated in the Table in Sarla Verma¹ read w ith para 42 of that judgment. 59.7 . The age of the deceas e d should be the basis for appl y ing the multiplier.

¶61

59.8 . Reasonable figures on conventional heads, namely, los s of estate, loss of consortium a nd funeral expenses should be Rs 15,000, Rs 40,000 and Rs 1 5,000 respectively. The afore s aid amounts should be enhance d at the rate of 10% in every t h ree years.”

¶62

Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Magma General Insurance

¶63

Company Limited Vs. Nanu Ram alias Chuhru Ram & Others [2018(18) SCC 130] after con s idering Sarla Verma (supra) and Pranay Sethi (Supra) has TRIPTI SAINI 2024.12.04 15:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶64

FAO-1292-2006 (O&M) - 10-

¶65

settled the law r egarding consortium. Releva n t paras of the same are reprod u ced as under:-

¶66

“ 21 . A Constitution Bench o f this Court in Pranay Sethi² d e alt with the various heads un d er which compensation is to be awarded in a death case. One of these heads is loss of consortium. In legal parlan c e, "consortium" is a compend i ous term which encompasses "spousal consortium", "pare n tal consortium", and "filial co n sortium". The right to consort i um would include the compan y , care, help, comfort, guida n ce, solace and affection of the deceased, which is a loss to his family. With respect to a spouse, it would include se x ual relations with the deceased sp ouse.

¶67

21.1. Spousal consortium is generally defined as ri g hts pertaining to the relationsh i p of a husband-wife which all o ws compensation to the survi v ing spouse for loss of "comp a ny, society, cooperation, affect i on, and aid of the other in e v ery conjugal relation".

¶68

21.2. Parental consortium is granted to the child upon the premature death of a parent, for loss of "parental a id, protection, affection, so c iety, discipline, guidance a nd training".

¶69

21.3. Filial consortium i s the right of the parents to compensation in the case o f an accidental death of a child. An accident leading to the deat h of a child causes great shock a nd

¶70

TRIPTI SAINI 2024.12.04 15:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶71

FAO-1292-2006 (O&M) - 11-

¶72

agony to the parents and f a mily of the deceased. The greatest agony for a parent is to lo s e their child during their lifetime. Children are valued for th e ir love, affection, companion s hip and their role in the family u nit.

¶73

22 . Consortium is a specia l prism reflecting changing no r ms about the status and wort h of actual relationships. Mo d ern jurisdictions world-over ha v e recognised that the value o f a child's consortium far ex c eeds the economic value of the compensation awarded in the case of the death of a child. M ost jurisdictions therefore p e rmit parents to be awar d ed compensation under loss of c onsortium on the death of a c h ild. The amount awarded to the parents is a compensation for l oss of the love, affection, care a nd companionship of the dece a sed child.

¶74

23 . The Motor Vehicles Act is a beneficial legislation aime d at providing relief to the victims or their families, in case s of genuine claims. In case w h ere a parent has lost their m i nor child, or unmarried son or d aughter, the parents are entitle d to be awarded loss of cons o rtium under the head of fi lial consortium. Parental consortium is awarded to children w ho lose their parents in motor vehicle accidents under the Ac t . A few High Courts have aw a rded compensation on this co u nt. However, there was no clar i ty with respect to the principle s on

¶75

TRIPTI SAINI 2024.12.04 15:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶76

FAO-1292-2006 (O&M) - 12-

¶77

which compensation coul d be awarded on loss of f i lial consortium.

¶78

24 . The amount of compens a tion to be awarded as consort i um will be governed by the pr i nciples of awarding compensa t ion under "loss of consortium" a s laid down in Pranay Sethi². In the present case, we deem it a p propriate to award the father a nd the sister of the deceased, a n amount of Rs 40,000 each for l oss of filial consortium.

¶79

CONCLUSION

¶80

In view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the above referred to judgments, the present ap p eal is allowed. The award d a ted 11.10.2005 is m odified accordingly. The a p pellants-claimants are entitle d to

¶81

enhanced comp e nsation as per the calculations m ade here-under:-

¶82

Sr. No.	Heads	Compensation Awarded
1	M onthly Income	R s.9,000/-
2	F uture prospects @40%	R s.3,600/- (9000 x 40%)
3	D ex eduction towards personal penditure 1/3^rd	R s.4,200/- [1/3 of 12600]
4	T otal Income	R s.8400/- (12600-4200)
5	M ultiplier	1 8
6	A nnual Dependency	R s.18,14,400/- (8400 x 12 x 5)
7	L oss of Estate	R s.18,000/-
8	F uneral Expenses	R s.18,000/-
9	L P S oss of Consortium arental : Rs.48,000/- x 1 pousal : Rs.48,000/- x 1	R s.96,000/-

¶83

TRIPTI SAINI 2024.12.04 15:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶84

FAO-1292-2006 (O&M) - 13-

¶85

T otal Compensation	R s.19,46,400/-
A mount Awarded by the	R s.96,000/-
T ribunal
E nhanced amount	R s.18,50,400/-

¶86

So far as the interest part is conc e rned, as held by Hon’ble Supr e me Court in Dara Singh @ Dhara Banjara Vs. Shyam Singh Varma 2019 ACJ 3176 and R.Valli and Others VS. Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (2022) 5 Supreme Court Cases 107, the appellants-cl a imants are granted the interes t @ 9% per annum o n the enhanced amount from t h e date of filing of claim petitio n till the date of its r e alization.

¶87

Th e Insurance Company is directe d to deposit the enhanced amou n t of compensation alongwith interest with the Trib u nal within a period of two mo n ths from the date o f receipt of certified copy of thi s judgment. The Tribunal is fur t her directed to dis b urse the enhanced amount of c o mpensation along with interest in the accounts of both the claimants/appellants as per ratio settled in the award d a ted 11.10.2005. The claimants/appellants are dire c ted to furnish their bank acc o unt details to the Tr i bunal.

¶88

As per award dated 11.10.2005, t he learned Tribunal decided i s sue no.5 in favour o f the insurance company, sinc e driver (respondent No.1) was not holding a valid driving licence at the time of accident. The insurance company was directed to deposit the compensation, but recovery rights were given to the insurance com p any. In view of the same, th e insurance company is directe d to deposit the enh a nced amount of compensation a longwith interest with the Trib u nal and liberty is gr a nted to recover the same.

¶89

TRIPTI SAINI 2024.12.04 15:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶90

FAO-1292-2006 (O&M) - 14-

¶91

In view of the order passed i n FAO No.1682 of 2007 d a ted 18.07.2024, th e insurance company is hereb y directed to deposit the cur r ent scheduled fees t o Mr. Ravinder Arora, Advoca t e within a period of ten days f r om the date of rece i pt of copy of this judgment.

¶92

Di s posed of accordingly.

¶93

Pe n ding applications, if any, also s t and disposed of.

¶94

November 8, 2 0 24 (SUDEEPTI SHARMA) tripti JUDGE

¶95

Wheth e r speaking/non-speaking : Spea k ing Wheth e r reportable : Yes/ N o

¶96

TRIPTI SAINI 2024.12.04 15:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Jasbir Singh and Anr. v. Surjit Singh and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jasbir Singh and Anr. v. Surjit Singh and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M.N.Khosla Vs v.K.Mehta

(O&M) Vinod Kumar Goyal Vs Stateof Punjab

(O&M) Vasu Dev. Operation Div Vs Executive Engineer Hisar & Others

Ram Chander Vs Amrik Singh and Ors.

(O&M) Anupama and Ors. Vs Anil Kumar and Ors.

(O&M) Amarjit Singh and Ors. Vs Gurjit Singh and Ors.