Point of Law : When compensation is awarded under the head loss of consortium, there is no justification in awarding compensation for loss of love and affection as a separate head.

JUDGMENT :

The appellant is the insurance company and the claimants are the cross objectors.

M.A.C.A No. 2888 of 2015

2. This is an appeal preferred by the 3rd respondent insurance company against the award dated 06.05.2015 in O.P.(MV) No.315/2013 on the file of the Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-IV, Ernakulam. The parties in this appeal are referred to as per the status in the claim petition unless otherwise specifically mentioned.

3. The case of the petitioners is that on 19.05.2012, at 4.35 p.m., while the deceased Sivaprasad was standing on the western side of the road at the power house bus stop, Vyttila, the car bearing Reg.No. KL-13K-01, driven by the first respondent in a rash and negligent manner, hit him and he sustained serious injuries and succumbed to the injuries on the way to hospital. The second respondent is the owner of the car and the third respondent is the insurer. An amount of Rs.32,83,740/- was claimed as compensation for the death of the deceased in the accident.

4. Before the Tribunal, respondents 1 and 2 were declared ex parte and the 3rd respondent filed written statement admitting that the car was insured with them, but contending that the accident occurred solely because of the negligence on the part of the deceased and that the compensation claimed is excessive.

5. The Tribunal awarded an amount of Rs.28,71,184/- (Rupees Twenty eight lakhs seventy one thousand one hundred and eighty four only) as total compensation for the death of the deceased with 9% interest per annum from the date of petition till realisation with proportionate costs. The 3rd respondent insurer was directed to satisfy the award.

6. The Tribunal awarded compensation under the following heads :

7. The appeal is preferred by the insurer mainly contending that the compensation awarded for loss of dependency is excessive. It is contended that the deceased was aged 53 years and had less than 3 years of service left and the Tribunal went wrong in allowing 15% increase for future prospectus and in applying the multiplier of ‘11’ and ought to have applied split multiplier. The appellant also contends that the compensation for loss of consortium, loss of love and affection and the interest on the amount allowed are excessive.

C.O. No.190/2015

8. The petitioners/the cross objectors contend that the amounts awarded towards loss of consortium, pain and sufferings and transport to and from hospital are inadequate.

9. As regards the cross objection, the learned senior counsel for the Insurance Company raised a preliminary objection contending that since the petitioners have been awarded compensation over and above the amounts claimed in the claim petition, the cross objection is not maintainable.

10. The petitioners had initially claimed an amount of Rs.27,83,740/- as total compensation. However, by order dated 14.01.2015 in I.A. No. 64/2014 in the O.P.(MV), the compensation claimed under various heads was permitted to be amended and the total compensation claimed has been amended as Rs.32,83,740/-. The total compensation awarded by the Tribunal is Rs.28,71,184/-. Therefore, the preliminary objection of the Insurer is not sustainable.

11. According to the learned senior counsel for the Insurer, the Tribunal went wrong in awarding Rs.26,48,184/- towards compensation for loss of dependency. The learned senior counsel contends that, the deceased had only less than 3 years of service left and the