SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(P&H) 207

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Alka Sarin, J.
Ramphal & Anr. – Appellants
Versus
Krishan Kumar & Ors. – Respondents
F.A.O. No. 2439 of 2008
Decided On : 12-01-2024

Advocates appeared:
For the Parties : Mr. Jagdeep S. Virk, Mr. Vipul Sharma, Mr. Ravinder Arora

Even if the claimant-appellants were not dependent on the deceased, they were entitled to compensation under the conventional heads and loss of filial consortium as per the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in a specific case.

Headnote:

Compensation - Dependency - Summary: The court considered the claim petition filed by the claimant-appellants on account of the death of their brother and held that even though the claimant-appellants were not dependent on the deceased, they were entitled to compensation under the conventional heads and loss of filial consortium as per the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in a specific case.

Fact of the Case:

The claim petition filed by the claimant-appellants on account of the death of their brother was dismissed by the Tribunal on the ground that the claimant-appellants were not dependent on the deceased.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the claimant-appellants, though not dependent on the deceased, were entitled to compensation under the conventional heads and loss of filial consortium as per the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in a specific case.

Issues: The issue was whether the claimant-appellants, who were not dependent on the deceased, were entitled to any compensation.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that even though the claimant-appellants were not dependent on the deceased, they were entitled to compensation under the conventional heads and loss of filial consortium as per the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in a specific case.

Final Decision: The present appeal was allowed, and the award passed by the Tribunal was modified accordingly, granting the claimant-appellants compensation under the conventional heads and loss of filial consortium.

Judgment

Mrs. Alka Sarin, J.

The present appeal has been filed by the claimant-appellants challenging the award dated 24.03.2008 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jind (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Tribunal’) whereby the claim petition filed by the claimant-appellants on account of death of their brother, namely, Subhash @ Tasa (hereinafter referred to as the ‘deceased’), was dismissed.

2. Since the facts, as recorded in the impugned award passed by the Tribunal are not in dispute, the same are not being reproduced herein for the sake of brevity.

3. Learned counsel for the claimant-appellants would contend that the claim petition was dismissed by the Tribunal only on the ground that the claimant-appellants are the real brothers of the deceased, who was unmarried and 35 years of age. It has been held by the Tribunal that the claimantappellants are both married and have their own children and hence, they could not be held to be dependent on the deceased and, as such, they are not entitled to claim any compensation. Learned counsel for the claimantappellants would further contend that even if the brothers were not entitled to compensation on account of death of the deceased, as no dependency could be proved, however, they would be entitled to compensation under the conventional heads as well as under the head of loss of consortium in view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of National Insurance Company Ltd. vs. Pranay Sethi & Ors. [(2017) 16 SCC 680].

4. Per contra learned counsel for respondent No.3-Insurance Company has contended that since the claimant-appellants were not dependent upon the deceased hence no amount of compensation is payable to them.

5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties.

6. In the present case the claimant-appellants are the real brothers of the deceased. Though they cannot be held to be dependent on the deceased as it has come in evidence that they are both earning, however, they would be entitled to compensation under the conventional heads i.e. loss of estate [Rs.18,000/- (Rs.15000+20%)] and funeral expenses [Rs.18,000/- (Rs.15000+20%)] and under the head loss of filial consortium [Rs.48,000/- each (Rs.40,000+20%)] keeping in view the law laid down in the case of Pranay Sethi (supra).

7. Accordingly, the claimant-appellants are granted the following compensation :

Sr. No.   

Heads

Compensation Awarded

1

 Loss of estate

Rs.18,000/- (Rs.15000+20%)

2

Funeral expenses

Rs.18,000/- (Rs.15000+20%)

3

Loss of Filial Consortium

Rs.96,000/- (48,000 x 2)

 

Total Compensation

Rs.1,32,000/-

8. The amount of compensation shall also attract interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the realization of the entire amount.

9. In view of the above discussion, the present appeal is allowed and the award passed by the Tribunal is modified accordingly. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed off.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top