Compensation can be awarded only for loss of consortium and not for loss of love and affection: Telangana High Court

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N. TUKARAMJI M.A.C.M.A. No.8515 JUDGMENT: Aggrieved by the quantum of compensation awarded the claimants petitioners filed this appeal against the decree and order dt.03.01.2015 passed in MVOP.No.934 of 2012 on the file of the Chairman Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal cum XIII Additional District and Sessions Judge Ranga Reddy District. The claim petition is filed seeking compensation of Rs.65 00 000 for the death of one P. Sandeep deceased who died in a road accident on 07.11.2012 at Gurunanak Engineering College Campus The claimants petitioners are the parents of Sandeep deceased. The appellants petitioners’ case in brief is that their son Sandeep was a bright student with excellent academic record and was studying B.Tech.in Gurunanak Engineering College Ibrahimpatnam went to college on 07.11.2012 to attend campus selections. At about 05:00 p.m. while Sandeep deceased was standing along with his friends to board the college bus an APSRTC Bus bearing Registration No.AP 29 TA 0629 driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner came from behind struck him. As a result he was crushed between two buses. Immediately the injured was shifted to Ankita Hospital Ibrahimpatnam for treatment. There the Doctors NTR J declared that the petitioner’s son is ‘brought dead’. Thereafter the appellants petitioners filed the petition claiming compensation. The Tribunal after due enquiry passed the order by granting Rs.40 50 000 loss of dependency Rs.5 000 transportation expenses Rs.2 000 for damage to clothing Rs.25 000 for funeral expenses and Rs.1 00 000 under loss of love and affection in total Rs.41 82 000 with interest at 7% per annum and both the respondents were jointly and severally liable to pay compensation. Aggrieved by the quantum of amount awarded the appellants petitioners filed the present Appeal contending that the Tribunal erred in properly assessing the material in computing compensation. Further pleaded that the Salary Certificate issued is for Rs.3 49 416 per annum but the Tribunal has taken only Rs.3 00 000 by considering statement of K. Anil Kumar P.W.3 that the amount includes commission. Hence the Tribunal without any basis erroneously deducted the amounts from the annual salary and it effected the quantum of compensation. On the other hand the counsel for 2nd respondent insurer submitted that the Tribunal by considering the material on record generously determined the monthly income of the deceased and awarded fair compensation therefore the impugned order may be The seminal point arises for determination is “whether the compensation awarded to petitioners is ‘just and proper” NTR J To prove the income the appellants petitioners placed the appointment order Ex.A.15 and got examined Sri K. Anil Kumar P.W.3 who is student counselor of the IT Consultant Firm shall be added towards future prospects of income. Thus the annual earnings of Sandeep deceased including future prospects would be Rs.4 90 000 . 13. As the deceased was a bachelor as per the authority of Sarla Verma & Ors Vs Delhi Transport Corp. & Anr 50% is to be deducted towards personal expenses from the annual earnings i.e. Rs.4 90 000 2 = Rs.2 45 000 . The remaining amount is the annual contribution of the deceased to the family. 14. As the age of the deceased is 20 years the relevant multiplier as per Sarla Verma is 18. If the annual contribution of the deceased is multiplied with the relevant multiplier 18 it comes to Rs.44 10 000 16 SCC 860 2 ACJ 2013 Page 1409 NTR J Rs.15 000 for loss of estate Rs.15 000 for funeral expenses is 16. Further the Hon’ble Supreme Court comprehensive interpretation to ‘consortium’ given in the authority of Magma General Insurance co. Ltd. vs. Nanu Ram & ors.3 held in United India Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Satinder Kaur @ Satwinder Kaur and others4 that the amounts for loss of consortium shall be awarded to parents as ‘filial consortium’ for the loss of their grown up children to compensate their agony love and affection care and companionship of deceased children and that the compensation can be awarded only for loss of consortium and not for loss of love and affection. Accordingly the 1st and 2nd appellants petitioners are entitled for Rs.40 000 each towards filial consortium. 17. Further the compensation towards transportation expenses and damage to clothing as granted by the Tribunal are confirmed. 18. Thus the total compensation that can be awarded to petitioners under various heads are as follows : Loss of Dependency Rs.44 10 000 ii) Loss of Estate Rs.15 000 iii) Funeral Expenses Rs.15 000 iv) Filial Consortium Rs.40 000 each 318 SCC 130 49 SCC 644 NTR J to 1st and 2nd petitioners : v) Transportation Rs.80 000 Rs.5 000 vi) Clothing Rs.2 000 Total Rs.45 27 000 In the above terms the awarded compensation to the appellants petitioners is modified. viz. : In the result the appeal is allowed in part in the following terms the appellants petitioners are granted Rs.45 27 000 towards compensation with proportionate costs and interest at 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization the 1st and 2nd respondents are jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation the 1st and 2nd respondents are directed to deposit the enhanced amount with interest within one month from the date of receipt of copy of the order and the apportionment of compensation amount shall be in terms of the Tribunal award and on deposit the appellants 1st and 2nd petitioner are permitted to withdraw entire amounts as per their share. NTR J 21. As a sequel miscellaneous petitions pending if any in this Appeal shall stand closed. Date: 10.11.2021 N. TUKARAMJI J 

Summary: The amounts for loss of consortium shall be awarded to parents as ‘filial consortium’ for the loss of their grown-up children, to compensate their agony, love and affection, care and companionship of deceased children as upheld by the High Court of Telangana through the learned bench led by Justice N. Tukaramji in the case of Polkampally Chalapathi Rao, Ranga Reddy Dist Anr vs Guru Nanak Edunl Socy, Ranga Reddy Dist Anr. (M.A.C.M.A. No.852 of 2015). The brief facts of the case are that the appellant’s son Sandeep was studying B.Tech. (final year) in Gurunanak Engineering College, Ibrahimpatnam, he went to college on 07.11.2012 to attend campus selections. At about 05:00 p.m., while Sandeep / deceased was standing along with his friends to board the college bus, an APSRTC Bus driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner came from behind, struck him. As a result, he was crushed between two buses. Immediately, the injured was shifted to Ankita Hospital, Ibrahimpatnam for treatment. There, the Doctors declared that the petitioner’s son is ‘brought dead’. Thereafter, the appellants / petitioners filed the petition, claiming compensation. The Tribunal after due enquiry passed the order by granting Rs.40,50,000/- towards loss of dependency, Rs.5,000/- towards transportation expenses; Rs.2,000/- for damage to clothing; Rs.25,000/- for funeral expenses; and Rs.1,00,000/- under loss of love and affection, in total Rs.41,82,000/- with interest at 7% per annum, and both the respondents were jointly and severally liable to pay compensation. Aggrieved by the quantum of amount awarded, the appellants / petitioners filed the present Appeal, contending that the Tribunal erred in properly assessing the material in computing compensation. Further, pleaded that the Salary Certificate issued is for Rs.3,49,416/- per annum, but the Tribunal has taken only Rs.3,00,000/-. Hence, the Tribunal without any basis erroneously deducted the amounts from the annual salary and it effected the quantum of compensation. On the other hand, the counsel for 2nd respondent / insurer submitted that the Tribunal by considering the material on record, generously determined the monthly income of the deceased, and awarded fair compensation, therefore, the impugned order may be confirmed. On perusal of the facts and arguments, the Hon’ble Court held, “In the present case, on the date of accident, the age of Sandeep / deceased is 20 years, therefore, 40% of the annual income, i.e., Rs.1,40,000/- (40% of 3,50,000/-) shall be added towards future prospects of income. Thus, the annual earnings of Sandeep / deceased including future prospects would be Rs.4,90,000/-.As the deceased was a bachelor, as per the authority of Sarla Verma &amp; Ors Vs Delhi Transport Corp. &amp; Anr , 50% is to be deducted towards personal expenses from the annual earnings, i.e., Rs.4,90,000 / 2 = Rs.2,45,000/-. The remaining amount is the annual contribution of the deceased to the family. 14. As the age of the deceased is 20 years, the relevant multiplier as per Sarla Verma is 18. If the annual contribution of the deceased is multiplied with the relevant multiplier 18, it comes to Rs.44,10,000/- (Rs.2,45,000/- x 18). This amount shall be awarded towards loss of dependency. 15. In addition, the petitioners are also entitled to compensation under conventional heads as per Pranay Sethi. Accordingly, 1 (2017) 16 SCC 860 2 ACJ 2013 Page 1409 NTR,J macma_852_2015 ::5:: Rs.15,000/- for loss of estate; Rs.15,000/- for funeral expenses is awarded. In the above terms, the awarded compensation to the appellants / petitioners is modified.”