In motor accident death claims, compensation for 'loss of love and affection' is not a distinct head; it is subsumed under the broader 'loss of consortium', which encompasses spousal, parental, and filial consortium, in accordance with the principles laid down by the Supreme Court in Pranay Sethi and ensuing judgments.

****

SUDEEPTI SHARMA J.

1. The present appeal has been preferred against the award dated 11.09.2015 passed in the claim petition filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (in short ‘1988 Act’), by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kurukshetra (in short ‘the Tribunal’) for enhancement of compensation, granted to the appellants/claimants to the tune of Rs.19,06,000/- along with interest @ 9 % per annum on account of death of deceased Manjeet Kaur in a Motor Vehicular Accident, occurred on 29.03.2012.

2. As sole issue for determination in the present appeal is confined to quantum of compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal, a detailed narration of the facts of the case is not required to be reproduced and is skipped herein for the sake of brevity.

SUBMISSIONS OF LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE PARTIES

3. The learned counsel for the appellants/claimants contends that the compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal is on the lower side and deserves to be enhanced. Therefore, she prays that the present appeal be allowed and the compensation awarded to the appellant/claimant be enhanced, as per latest law.

4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent No.3-Insurance Company contends that compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal is on the higher side and he has filed separate appeal bearing No.FAO-8584-2015, titled as “National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Dharamvir Mor and others” for seeking reduction of compensation. He further contends that learned Tribunal has committed an error in law by awarding compensation separately under the heads of “loss of consortium” as well as “loss of love and affection.” He has placed reliance upon the Constitution Bench judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi, 2017) 16 SCC 680] to contend that compensation under the head of “loss of love and affection” is not permissible, and the claimants are entitled only to compensation under the conventional head of “loss of consortium.” He furthermore contends that compensation awarded for loss of estate is also on the higher side.

9. On the strength of aforesaid submissions, he prays that the present appeal be dismissed and the impugned award passed by the learned Tribunal be suitably modified by reducing the amount of compensation.

5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the whole record of this case.

SETTLED LAW ON COMPENSATION

6. Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sarla Verma Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and Another [(2009) 6 Supreme Court Cases 121], laid down the law on assessment of compensation and the relevant paras of the same are as under:-

“30. Though in some cases the deduction to be made towards personal and living expenses is calculated on the basis of units indicated in Trilok Chandra, the general practice is to apply standardised deductions. Having a considered several subsequent decisions of this Court, we are of the view that where the deceased was married, the deduction towards personal and living expenses of the deceased, should be one-third (1/3rd) where the number of dependent family members is 2 to 3, one-fourth (1/4th) where the number of dependent family members is 4 to 6, and one-fifth (1/5th) where the number of dependent family members exceeds six.

31. Where the deceased was a bachelor and the claimants are the parents, the deduction follows a different principle. In regard to bachelors, normally, 50% is deducted as personal and living expenses, because it is assumed that a bachelor would tend to spend more on himself. Even otherwise, ther