The court held that lack of award for loss of filial consortium and escalation in compensation was unjustified and required recalibration of awarded sums.

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF)

This appeal filed by the claimants/appellants seeking for enhancement of compensation arising out of judgment and award dated 05.09.2018 in MVC No.720/2016 passed by the Additional Senior Civil Judge and Additional MACT at Bidar, only on the ground of quantum.

2. The date of accident, involvement of vehicle, death of Amar S/o Dhanraj, aged 20 years so also the liability to pay compensation are not in dispute. The only dispute is with respect to inadequate compensation awarded by the Tribunal.

3. Heard Sri Sandeep Vijay Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the appellants/ claimants and Sri Sudarshan M, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2/insurance company. Vide order dated 05.01.2021, notice of this appeal on respondent No.1 is dispensed with.

4. Sri. Sandeep Vijay Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the appellants/claimants vehemently submitted that this appeal is restricted only with respect to non awarding of compensation under the filial consortium so also 10% escalation, on the said conventional head. The Tribunal has taken the income and awarded appropriate compensation under the head loss of dependency. Hence, he sought to allow the appeal only to the extent of loss of consortium and 10% escalation. 5. Refuting the submission of learned counsel appearing for the appellant, Sri.M.Sudarshan with all vehemence submitted that the Tribunal has taken the income at the rate of Rs.10,000/- instead of Rs.8,750/- as per the chart in the absence of any proof of income. Though, the Tribunal has not awarded any compensation under the loss of consortium. The compensation awarded taking higher income may kindly be adjusted towards the same. As such there is no interference required at the hands of this Court. According sought to dismiss the appeal.

6. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties, perused the entire appeal papers and also trial Court records.

7. The only question that would arise for consideration before this Court is:

Whether the Tribunal justified in not awarding any compensation under the head filial consortium and not awarding 10% towards escalation on the compensation awarded under the conventional head?

8. My answer to the above point of consideration is in negative for the following:

REASONS

9. Though, the Tribunal has taken Rs.10,000/- as against Rs.8,750/-. However, as per the contentions of the claimant before the Tribunal the deceased was driver and he is a skilled person than an unskilled labourer to whom the income fixed under the charge was Rs.8,750/-. The insurance company is not in appeal. Accordingly, the contention of learned counsel appearing for the insurance company that the Tribunal has taken higher income cannot be countenanced. The Tribunal has not awarded any compensation under the head loss of filial consortium so also 10% escalation as held by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. VS. PRANAY

1 SETHI and RASMITA BISWAL & OTHERS VS. DIVISIONAL MANAGER, NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED AND ANOTHER². In view of awarding the filial compensation as well as 10% escalation, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal requires reconsideration and re-determination. On re-

determination, the compensation comes to :

1 (2017) 16 SCC 680 (2022) 2 SC 767