The court reaffirmed the right to compensation for loss of love and affection in personal injury claims, emphasizing the need for comprehensive award considerations beyond mere economic losses.

ORDER :

1. Leave granted.

2. Being aggrieved by the judgment and award of the High Court in FAO No.1798/2014(O&M) dated 24.08.2018 with regard to the reduction of compensation awarded by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (for short “the Tribunal”) in respect of a road traffic accident that occurred on 21.04.2011, the claimants, being the parents of the deceased-Rupanshi Gupta, have preferred this appeal.

3. We have heard learned counsel for the appellants, Mr. Dinesh Chandra Pandey and learned counsel for the respondent-Insurer Mr. Shivam Singh at length.

4. Appellants’ counsel submitted that the Tribunal had rightly assessed the compensation at Rs.47,10,000/- (Rupees Forty Seven Lakhs and Ten Thousands only) with interest at 7.5% per annum from the date of the Claim Petition till realisation and a sum of Rs.35,31,151/-(Rupees Thirty Five Lakhs, Thirty One Thousand, one Hundred and Fifty One Only) was also deposited and which has been received by the appellants herein. However, in the appeal filed by the respondent-Insurer, the High Court, by the impugned judgment has reduced the compensation to Rs.30,54,000/-(Rupees Thirty Lakhs 1 and Fifty Four Thousand Only) only and hence, the appellants being aggrieved by the reduction of compensation to an extent of Rs.16,56,000/-(Rupees Sixteen Lakhs and Fifty Six Thousand Only) have preferred this appeal.

5. He submitted that the deceased was a B.Tech (Computer Science) student studying in an Engineering College at Mullana, Haryana and had she completed her course, she would have earned at least Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) per month which fact had been recognized by the Tribunal, however, the High Court has simply reduced the notional monthly income to Rs.20,000/-(Rupees Twenty Thousand Only) per month and has further deducted 50% of the earnings towards personal expenses and not awarded any compensation towards filial consortium and loss of love and affection.

6. Consequently, the appellants being the parents of the deceased-daughter have preferred this appeal and hence, the compensation may be re-assessed and hence, the compensation as awarded by the Tribunal may be restored.

7. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent-Insurer supported the impugned judgment and submitted that the award of compensation by the High Court is just and proper and therefore, a direction for recovery of Rs.16,56,000/-(Rupees sixteen Lakhs and Fifty Six Thousand only) if already paid, has been issued and hence, there is no merit in this appeal.

8. We have considered the rival submissions in light of the impugned judgment of the High Court as well as the judgment of the Tribunal and in light of the material on record. While we find that the High Court was justified in computing the notional monthly 2 income of the deceased at Rs.20,000/-(Rupees twenty thousand only) per month and adding 40% increase to the said income towards future prospects and since the deceased was not married by deducting 50% of the monthly income towards personal expenses and awarding Rs.30,24,000/- (Rupees Thirty Lakhs and Twenty Four Thousands only) towards the loss of dependency, we however find that the High Court has not awarded compensation on the head of loss of love and affection and also on the head of loss of filial consortium. Hence, we award compensation on the aforesaid heads to an extent of Rs.88,000/-(Rupees Eighty Eight thousand) and Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only) having regard to the judgment of this Court in the case of National Insurance Company Limited vs. Pranay Sethi reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680 and Magma General Insurance Company Limited vs. Nanu