1

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

MCC No. 256 of 2021

1. Smt. Laxmi Bai W/o Late Vijay Kuamr Kesharwani Aged About 40

Years,

2. Ku. Heena D/o Late Vijay Kumar Kesharwani Aged About 18 Years,

3. Ku. Anju D/o Late Vijay Kumar Kesharwani Aged About 15 Years,

4. Ku. Nisha D/o Late Vijay Kumar Kesharwani Aged About 13 Years,

5. Ku. Deepali D/o Late Vijay Kumar Kesharwani Aged About 11 Years,

6. Anand S/o Late Vijay Kumar Kesharwani Aged About 8 Years,

7. Ramadhar S/o Late Rambharosh Kesharwani Aged About 70 Years,

Applicants No.3 to 6 are minor through Natural Guardian Mother Smt.

Laxmi Bai

All are R/o Village- Shardha, Thana And Tahsil- Lormi, District :

Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

---- Applicants

Versus

1. Bhushan Singh @ Tinku S/o Rajendra Singh Thakur Aged About 21

Years (Driver Of The Offending Vehicle Motor Cycle No. C.G. 04/

D.H./ 4712)

2. Ravi Singh Thakur S/o Rajendra Singh Thakur Aged About 28 Years,

Respondent No. 1 and 2 are R/o Rani Gaon, Thana And Tehsil-

Lormi, District- Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. (Owner Of The Offending

Vehicle Motor Cycle No. C.G.04/D.H./4712)

3. Iffco Tokieo General Insurance Company Limited Branch Office, 3rd

Floor (Tal) Shop No. 345,347 Lal Ganga Shopping Complex G.E.

Road, Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh. (Insurer Of The

Offending Vehicle Motor Cycle No. C.G. 04/D.H./ 4712)

--- Respondents

For Applicants

: Mr. A.L. Singroul, Advocate

For Respondent No. 3

: Mr. P. R. Patankar, Advocate

D.B.: Hon'ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava

Hon'ble Smt. Justice Vimla Singh Kapoor

Order on Board by

Manindra Mohan Shrivastava

, J.

09.06.2021

1.

As in the present case, the liability for payment of compensation has

been given fastened on the insurance company and not on the driver and

owner at the first instance, we do not consider it necessary to issue the

2

notice to the driver and the owner before passing final order in the present

application.

2.

Learned counsel for the applicants made a short and pointed

submission that while awarding compensation for loss of parental

consortium of Rs.40,000/-, the order passed by this Court does not clarify

this amount is payable to each of the children (Respondent Nos. 2 to 7). He

submits that the principles of law on which the compensation for loss of

parental consortium was awarded by this Court to the widow and the

children has been laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of National

Insurance Company Limited V. Pranay Sethi & Others¹ and Magma

General Insurance Company Limited V. Nanu Ram Alias Chuhru Ram

& Others². He would submit that as the object and purpose of awarding

such compensation is to compensate each of the family members whether

widow or children towards loss of affection etc., the amount is to be paid on

per head basis.

3.

Learned counsel for the insurance company would submit that this

aspect could have been raised by the applicant at the time of hearing of the

case and passing of the final order on 06.05.2021, but it was not pointed

out, therefore, there is no defect requiring any correction in the order dated

06.05.2021 passed in MAC No.869/2013.

4.

We have heard counsel for the parties and perused the records,

order dated 06.05.2021 as also the principles of law laid down by the

Supreme Court in the case of National Insurance Company Limited V.

Pranay Sethi & Others and Magma General Insurance Company

Limited V. Nanu Ram Alias Chuhru Ram & Others.

5.

Relying upon the principles with regard to grant of compensation as

laid down by constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in the case of

1

(2017) 16 SCC 680

2

(2018) 18 SCC 130

3

National Insurance Company Limited V. Pranay Sethi & Others and

Magma General Insurance Company Limited V. Nanu Ram Alias

Chuhru Ram & Others, in the recent judicial pronouncement in the case of

Magma General Insurance Company Limited V. Nanu Ram Alias

Chuhru Ram & Others (supra) their Lordship in the Supreme Court

clea