Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Chh) 24510
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Sanjay K. Agrawal, J
Seema Dhruv – Appellant
Versus
Indrabahadur Kachi – Respondent
MAC No. 1129 of 2019
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Pooja Yadav, Shivendu Pandya
For the Respondents: Akash Shrivastava
Claimants including parents and children of a deceased person in a motor accident are entitled to consortium compensation (filial and parental) in addition to the spouse, following Supreme Court precedents.
Headnote:(A) Motor Accident Claims - Compensation - Consortium - Entitlement of parents and children to consortium compensation in addition to the spouse, as per established legal principles and Supreme Court guidelines. (Para 5)
Issues: Whether the parents and child of the deceased are entitled to consortium compensation in addition to the spouse.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. appeal for enhancement of compensation and opposing arguments by the insurance company. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. entitlement of parents and children to consortium compensation based on supreme court precedents. (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. modification of the award and enhancement of the compensation amount. (Para 7 , 8) |
1. This appeal has been filed by the appellants/claimants under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short “Act of 1988”) seeking enhancement in the compensation amount, against the impugned award dated 07.08.2018 passed by the Learned 2nd Additional/Upper Motor Accident Claim Tribunal, Mahasamund, District Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh (for short “Claims Tribunal”) in Claim Case No. H- 151/2016, whereby the Claims Tribunal allowed the claimants’ applica- tion and awarded Rs. 42,43,760/- along with interest for death of Bhu- pendra Singh Dhruv.
2. Learned counsel for the appellants, would submit that the Claims Tri- bunal has erred in awarding the less compensation. He would further submit that consortium filial and parental have not been awarded by the Claims Tribunal which is liable to be awarded.
3. Learned counsel for the Insurance Company/respondent No.3, would oppose the prayer made by learned counsel for the appellant and sub- mit that compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal is no higher side which is liable to be reduced.
4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival sub- missions made herein above and gone through the records minutely.
5. The Claims Tribunal has not awarded any amount under the conven- tional head of consortium to the appellants No. 2 to 4. In view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the claimants No. 2 to 4 are also entitled to compensation under the said head.
6. Thus, in light of the aforesaid discussion and in light of the judgments of the Supreme Court rendered in the matters of National Insurance Company Ltd. V. Pranay Sethi , 1(2017) 16 SCC 680, Sarla Verma & Ors. Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation & Ors2(2009) 6 SCC 121 and Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nanu Ram @ Chuhru Ram & Ors.3(2018) 18 SCC 130, this Court is computing the compensation as below:-
[[IMG_1]]
7. In view of the aforesaid analysis, the amount of compensation of Rs. 42,43,760/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal is enhanced to Rs. 43,63,760/-. Hence, after deducting the amount of Rs. 42,43,760/-, the appellants/claimants are held to be entitled to an additional amount of Rs. 1,20,000/-. The concerned respondent is directed to deposit the amount of compensation as enhanced by this Court within a period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The addi- tional amount of compensation shall carry interest @6% per annum from the date of filing of claim application before the Tribunal till its real- ization. Rest of the conditions of the impugned award shall remain in- tact.
8. Accordingly, this appeal is allowed in part and the impugned award is modified to the extent as indicated herein-above.
