Punjab-Haryana High Court
Rani And Others vs Harmit Singh And Others on 27 February, 2025
Author: Sudeepti Sharma
Bench: Sudeepti Sharma
FAO-4331-2006 (O&M) -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
206 FAO-4331-2006 (O&M)
Date of Decision: 27.02.2025
Rani and others ......Appellants
Vs.
Harmit Singh alias Kala and others ......Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA
Present: Mr. Abhishek Sharma, Advocate for
Mr. Vishal Gupta, Advocate,
for the appellants.
Mr. Punit Jain, Advocate
for respondent No.3-Insurance Company
*****
SUDEEPTI SHARMA J. (ORAL)
1. The present appeal has been preferred against the award dated
13.06.2006 passed in the claim petition filed under Section 166 of the Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988 by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ropar
(for short, ‘the Tribunal’) for enhancement of compensation, granted to the
claimants/appellants to the tune of Rs.3,75,000/- along with interest at the
rate of 6% per annum, on account of death of Amar Nath in a Motor
Vehicular Accident, occurred on 02.02.2001.
2. As sole issue for determination in the present appeal is confined
to quantum of compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal, a detailed
narration of the facts of the case is not reproduced and is skipped herein for
the sake of brevity.
VIRENDRA SINGH ADHIKARI
2025.03.12 18:59
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
FAO-4331-2006 (O&M) -2-
SUBMISSIONS OF THE LEARNED COUNSELS FOR THE PARTIES
3. The learned counsel for the appellants/claimants contends :-
i) that the compensation assessed by the learned Tribunal is
on the lower side and deserves to be enhanced.
ii) that deceased-Amar Nath was 45 years old; was doing
agricultural work and was earning Rs.10,000/- per month.
iii) that the learned Tribunal has erred in awarding meager
amount towards loss of estate and funeral expenses. Moreover,
no amount has been granted towards loss of consortium and
future prospects. Therefore, he prays that the present appeal be
allowed and compensation be enhanced, as per latest law.
4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent-Insurance
Company, however, vehemently argues on the lines of the award and
contends that the amount of compensation as assessed by the learned
Tribunal has rightly been granted. Therefore, he prays for dismissal of the
appeal.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the
whole record of this case.
6. A perusal of the award shows that deceased-Amar Nath was 45
years old. A perusal of the award further shows that the learned Tribunal has
rightly assessed the income of the deceased as Rs.3,000/- per month by
taking into consideration the minimum wages prevalent at that time. A
perusal of the award further shows that the learned Tribunal also wrongly
VIRENDRA SINGH ADHIKARI
2025.03.12 18:59
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
FAO-4331-2006 (O&M) -3-
applied the multiplier of 15 instead of 14. Moreover, the amount awarded
towards funeral expenses and loss of estate is on the lower side and no
amount has been awarded towards future prospectus and loss of consortium.
7. Further perusal of the record shows that the deceased before his
death had suffered various grievous injuries on his body making his life
miserable. As a result, he had to depend on others for his daily activities and
likely employed an attendant to assist him with his physical movements.
The Co-ordinate Bench of this Court has dealt with the same issue in a
judgment passed in FAO-4516-2006 titled as ‘Neelam Devi and others Vs.
Baljit and others‘ decided on 04.12.2012. The relevant portion of the same
is reproduced as under:-
“6. The fact remains that deceased Jag Bhagwan who
was admitted to PGIMS, Rohtak on reference for 47 long
days died on 15.7.2008 in the hospital itself. When the
patient had died in the hospital itself, the hospital would
not have thought of issuing any discharge summary. Of
course, the records maintained by the PGIMS, Rohtak
should have been summoned by the claimants. But, just
because they had not summoned the hospital records, we
cannot reject the case of the claimants as Ex.P2, P3 and
P9 would go to show that the injured was admitted to
hospital for treatment in an unconscious state for the
blood clot in the mid cerebral region and died in the
hospital during the course of treatment.
7. It is not a common practice for such hospitals to
issue prescriptions for purchasing medicines. Some slips
are issued to the caretaker of the patient for the purposeVIRENDRA SINGH ADHIKARI
2025.03.12 18:59
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
FAO-4331-2006 (O&M) -4-of procuring the medicine from outside. The hospital
authorities simply maintain medical records showing the
prescriptions.
8. The injured had taken treatment for 47 long days,
that too, in an unconscious state. At least, one or two
attendants would have definitely attended him during the
course of treatment. The claimants would have spent at
least a sum Rs.200/- per day towards attendant charges.”
In view of the above referred to judgment, the
appellants/claimants are also entitled to the attendant charges at the rate of
Rs.150/- per day from the date of accident till the date of the death of
deceased.
8. Further perusal of the record shows that the accident, which
caused the death of the deceased, took place on 02.02.2001 and he died later,
on 18.06.2002. During this time span, the deceased remained admitted in
the Hospital for his life saving treatment and during this course, he must
have endured unbearable pain on his person. This Court has already dealt
with the same aspect in the case bearing FAO No.5040 of 2006 titled as
Hans Raj and another Vs. Mohit Mittal and others. The relevant portion
of the same is reproduced as under:-
“10. The claimants are also entitled for pain and
suffering in view of judgment of Hon’ble the Apex Court
in a case of Divisional Manager, Oriental Insurance
Co. Ltd vs. Maran Chandra Das and others, 2023
ACJ 864 wherein it has been held as under:-
VIRENDRA SINGH ADHIKARI
2025.03.12 18:59
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
FAO-4331-2006 (O&M) -5-
Having heard learned counsel for the
petitioner at a considerable length, we do not find
any ground to interfere with the impugned
judgment dated 7.1.2021 passed by the High
Court of Tripura.
2. The question of law sought to be raised on
behalf of the petitioner does not arise for
consideration for the reason that the deceased son
of the respondent(s) met with an accident on
20.10.2015 and he remained hospitalised at
Kolkata where multiple surgeries were performed
on him. However, he could not survive and
succumbed to injuries on 13.9.2016.
3. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of
this case, where the parents witnessed the pain,
agony and suffering of their son for almost one
year, the compensation awarded by the High
Court, under the head of pain and suffering,
cannot be said to be without any basis. The
parents themselves also suffered unbearable pain
every moment during this entire period”
11. In view of the above referred to judgment (supra),
the claimants/appellants are held entitled for grant of
compensation under the head of pain and suffering, as
the deceased remained admitted in the hospital w.e.f
09.02.2005 to 14.04.2005.”
9. On the touchstone of above referred to judgment, the
appellants/claimants are held entitled for grant of compensation on account
of the pain and suffering suffered by the deceased before his unfortunate
death. Therefore, the award requires interference of this Court.
VIRENDRA SINGH ADHIKARI
2025.03.12 18:59
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
FAO-4331-2006 (O&M) -6-
SETTLED LAW ON COMPENSATION
10. Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sarla Verma Vs. Delhi
Transport Corporation and Another [(2009) 6 Supreme Court Cases
121], laid down the law on assessment of compensation and the relevant
paras of the same are as under:-
“30. Though in some cases the deduction to be made towards
personal and living expenses is calculated on the basis of units
indicated in Trilok Chandra, the general practice is to apply
standardised deductions. Having a considered several
subsequent decisions of this Court, we are of the view that
where the deceased was married, the deduction towards
personal and living expenses of the deceased, should be one-
third (1/3rd) where the number of dependent family members is
2 to 3, one-fourth (1/4th) where the number of dependent family
members is 4 to 6, and one-fifth (1/5th) where the number of
dependent family members exceeds six.
31. Where the deceased was a bachelor and the claimants are
the parents, the deduction follows a different principle. In
regard to bachelors, normally, 50% is deducted as personal and
living expenses, because it is assumed that a bachelor would
tend to spend more on himself. Even otherwise, there is also the
possibility of his getting married in a short time, in which event
the contribution to the parent(s) and siblings is likely to be cut
drastically. Further, subject to evidence to the contrary, the
father is likely to have his own income and will not be
considered as a dependant and the mother alone will be
considered as a dependant. In the absence of evidence to the
contrary, brothers and sisters will not be considered asVIRENDRA SINGH ADHIKARI
2025.03.12 18:59
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
FAO-4331-2006 (O&M) -7-dependants, because they will either be independent and
earning, or married, or be dependent on the father.
32. Thus even if the deceased is survived by parents and
siblings, only d the mother would be considered to be a
dependant, and 50% would be treated as the personal and
living expenses of the bachelor and 50% as the contribution to
the family. However, where the family of the bachelor is large
and dependent on the income of the deceased, as in a case
where he has a widowed mother and large number of younger
non-earning sisters or brothers, his personal and living
expenses may be restricted to one-third and contribution to the
family will be taken as two-third.
* * * * *
42. We therefore hold that the multiplier to be used should be as
mentioned in Column (4) of the table above (prepared by
applying Susamma Thomas³, Trilok Chandra and Charlie),
which starts with an operative multiplier of 18 (for the age
groups of 15 to 20 and 21 to 25 years), reduced by one unit for
every five years, that is M-17 for 26 to 30 years, M-16 for 31 to
35 years, M-15 for 36 to 40 years, M-14 for 41 to 45 years, and
M-13 for 46 to 50 years, then reduced by two units for every
five years, that is, M-11 for 51 to 55 years, M-9 for 56 to 60
years, M-7 for 61 to 65 years and M-5 for 66 to 70 years.
10. Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of National Insurance
Company Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi & Ors. [(2017) 16 SCC 680] has clarified
the law under Sections 166, 163-A and 168 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988,
on the following aspects:-
(A) Deduction of personal and living expenses to determine
multiplicand;
(B) Selection of multiplier depending on age of deceased;
VIRENDRA SINGH ADHIKARI
2025.03.12 18:59
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
FAO-4331-2006 (O&M) -8-
(C) Age of deceased on basis for applying multiplier;
(D) Reasonable figures on conventional heads, namely, loss
of estate, loss of consortium and funeral expenses, with
escalation;
(E) Future prospects for all categories of persons and for
different ages: with permanent job; self-employed or fixed
salary.
The relevant portion of the judgment is reproduced as under:-
“52. As far as the conventional heads are concerned,
we find it difficult to agree with the view expressed in
Rajesh². It has granted Rs.25,000 towards funeral
expenses, Rs 1,00,000 towards loss of consortium and Rs
1,00,000 towards loss of care and guidance for minor
children. The head relating to loss of care and minor
children does not exist. Though Rajesh refers to Santosh
Devi, it does not seem to follow the same. The
conventional and traditional heads, needless to say,
cannot be determined on percentage basis because that
would not be an acceptable criterion. Unlike
determination of income, the said heads have to be
quantified. Any quantification must have a reasonable
foundation. There can be no dispute over the fact that
price index, fall in bank interest, escalation of rates in
many a field have to be noticed. The court cannot remain
oblivious to the same. There has been a thumb rule in this
aspect. Otherwise, there will be extreme difficulty in
determination of the same and unless the thumb rule is
applied, there will be immense variation lacking any kind
of consistency as a consequence of which, the orders
passed by the tribunals and courts are likely to be
unguided. Therefore, we think it seemly to fix reasonableVIRENDRA SINGH ADHIKARI
2025.03.12 18:59
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
FAO-4331-2006 (O&M) -9-sums. It seems to us that 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 principle of
revisiting the said heads is an acceptable principle. But
the revisit should not be fact-centric or quantum-centric.
We think that it would be condign that the amount that we
have quantified should be enhanced on percentage basis
in every three years and the enhancement should be at
the rate of 10% in a span of three years. We are disposed
to hold so because that will bring in consistency in
respect of those heads.
* * * *
59.3. While determining the income, an addition of 50%
of actual salary to the income of the deceased towards
future prospects, where the deceased had a permanent
job and was below the age of 40 years, should be made.
The addition should be 30%, if the age of the deceased
was between 40 to 50 years. In case the deceased was
between the age of 50 to 60 years, the addition should be
15%. Actual salary should be read as actual salary less
tax.
59.4. In case the deceased was self-employed (or) on a
fixed salary, an addition of 40% of the established
income should be the warrant where the deceased was
below the age of 40 years. An addition of 25% where the
deceased was between the age of 40 to 50 years and 10%
where the deceased was between the age of 50 to 60
years should be regarded as the necessary method ofVIRENDRA SINGH ADHIKARI
2025.03.12 18:59
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
FAO-4331-2006 (O&M) -10-computation. The established income means the income
minus the tax component.
59.5. For determination of the multiplicand, the
deduction for personal and living expenses, the tribunals
and the courts shall be guided by paras 30 to 32 of Sarla
Verma⁴ which we have reproduced hereinbefore.
59.6. The selection of multiplier shall be as indicated in
the Table in Sarla Verma¹ read with para 42 of that
judgment.
59.7. The age of the deceased should be the basis for
applying the multiplier.
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 should be enhanced
at the rate of 10% in every three years.”
12. Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Magma General
Insurance Company Limited Vs. Nanu Ram alias Chuhru Ram &
Others [2018(18) SCC 130] after considering Sarla Verma (supra) and
Pranay Sethi (Supra) has settled the law regarding consortium. Relevant
paras of the same are reproduced as under:-
“21. A Constitution Bench of this Court in Pranay Sethi²
dealt with the various heads under which compensation
is to be awarded in a death case. One of these heads is
loss of consortium. In legal parlance, “consortium” is a
compendious term which encompasses “spousalVIRENDRA SINGH ADHIKARI
2025.03.12 18:59
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
FAO-4331-2006 (O&M) -11-consortium”, “parental consortium”, and “filial
consortium”. The right to consortium would include the
company, care, help, comfort, guidance, solace and
affection of the deceased, which is a loss to his family.
With respect to a spouse, it would include sexual
relations with the deceased spouse.
21.1. Spousal consortium is generally defined as rights
pertaining to the relationship of a husband-wife 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”.
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.
22. Consortium is a special prism reflecting changing
norms about the status and worth of actual relationships.
Modern jurisdictions world-over have recognised 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
VIRENDRA SINGH ADHIKARI
2025.03.12 18:59
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
FAO-4331-2006 (O&M) -12-
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.
23. The Motor Vehicles Act is a beneficial legislation
aimed at providing relief to the victims or their families,
in cases of genuine claims. In case where a parent has
lost their minor child, or unmarried son or daughter, the
parents are entitled to be awarded loss of consortium
under the head of filial consortium. Parental consortium
is awarded to children who lose their parents in motor
vehicle accidents under the Act. A few High Courts have
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.
24. The amount of compensation to be awarded as
consortium will be governed by the principles of
awarding compensation under “loss of consortium” as
laid down in Pranay Sethi². In the present case, we deem
it appropriate to award the father and the sister of the
deceased, an amount of Rs 40,000 each for loss of filial
consortium.
RELIEF
13. In view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in
the above referred to judgments, the present appeal is allowed and the award
dated 13.06.2006 is modified accordingly. The appellants/claimants are
VIRENDRA SINGH ADHIKARI
2025.03.12 18:59
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
FAO-4331-2006 (O&M) -13-
entitled to the enhanced compensation as per the calculations made here-
under:-
Sr. No. Heads Compensation Awarded
1 Monthly Income Rs.3,000/-
2 Future prospects @ 25% Rs.750/- (25% of 3,000)
3 Deduction towards personal Rs.1,250/- {(3,000 + 750) X 1/3}
expenditure 1/3rd
4 Total Income Rs.2,500/- (3,750 - 1,250)
5 Multiplier 14
6 Annual Dependency Rs.4,20,000/- (2,500 X 12 X 14)
7 Loss of Estate Rs.18,000/-
8 Funeral Expenses Rs.18,000/-
9 Attendant Charges Rs.29,250/-
10 Pain and Suffering Rs.1,50,000/-
11 Loss of Consortium Rs.1,44,000/-
Spousal : Rs. 48,000 x 1
Parental : Rs.48,000 x 2
Total Compensation Rs.7,79,250/-
Amount Awarded by the Rs.3,75,000/-
Tribunal
Enhanced amount Rs.4,04,250/-
(Rs.7,79,250 - 3,75,000)
14. So far as the interest part is concerned, as held by Hon’ble
Supreme 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-claimants
are granted the interest @ 9% per annum on the enhanced amount from the
date of filing of claim petition till the date of its realization.
VIRENDRA SINGH ADHIKARI
2025.03.12 18:59
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
FAO-4331-2006 (O&M) -14-
15. The respondents No.3-Insurance Company is directed to deposit
the enhanced amount of compensation along with interest with the Tribunal
within a period of two months from today. The Tribunal is further directed to
disburse the enhanced amount of compensation along with interest in the
accounts of the claimants/appellants as per the amount settled in the award
dated 13.06.2006. The claimants/appellants are directed to furnish their bank
account details to the Tribunal.
16. Respondent No.3-Insurance Company is hereby directed to
disburse the current scheduled fees to Mr. Punit Jain, Advocate, within a
period of 20 days from the date of receipt of the copy of this judgment, in
view of the order dated 18.07.2024 passed in FAO No.1682 of 2007 by this
Court.
17. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.
(SUDEEPTI SHARMA)
JUDGE
27.02.2025
Virrendra
Whether speaking/non-speaking : Speaking
Whether reportable : Yes/No
VIRENDRA SINGH ADHIKARI
2025.03.12 18:59
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
