# The New India Assurance Company Ltd v. Smt. Renu & Ors

- **Citation:** (2021) 9 ILRA 751
- **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
- **Decided:** 2021-09-13
- **Case number:** F.A.F.O. No. 724 of 2018
- **Bench:** Ravi Nath Tilhari
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/the-new-india-assurance-company-ltd-v-smt-renu-ors-47392
- **Pages:** 9

## Headnote

752 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
Motor
accident
Claim-challenge
to
quantum of compensation-loss of love and
affection is comprehended in loss of
consortium-no
justification
to
award
compensation towards loss of love and
affection
as
a
separate
head-total
awarded amount do not deserves to be
reduced-Motor Vehicle Act is a beneficial
legislation-amount awarded under head of
loss of love and affection is held to be also
towards "loss of consortium.

Appeal dismissed. (E-9)

List of Cases cited:

## Text

9 All The New India Assurance Company Ltd. Vs. Smt. Renu & Ors.
751
amount is deposited. The amount already
deposited be deducted from the amount to
be deposited.

21. On depositing the amount in the
Registry of Tribunal, Registry is directed to
first deduct the amount of deficit court fees,
if any. Considering the ratio laid down by
the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of A.V.
Padma V/s. Venugopal, Reported in 2012
(1) GLH (SC), 442, the order of
investment is not passed because applicants
/claimants are neither illiterate or restic
villagers.

22. In view of the ratio laid down by
Hon'ble Gujarat High Court, in the case of
Smt. Hansaguti P. Ladhani v/s The
Oriental
Insurance
Company
Ltd.,
reported in 2007(2) GLH 291, total
amount of interest, accrued on the principal
amount
of
compensation
is
to
be
apportioned on financial year to financial
year basis and if the interest payable to
claimant for any financial year exceeds
Rs.50,000/-,
insurance
company/owner
is/are entitled to deduct appropriate amount
under the head of 'Tax Deducted at Source'
as provided u/s 194A (3) (ix) of the Income
Tax Act, 1961 and if the amount of interest
does not exceeds Rs.50,000/- in any
financial year, registry of this Tribunal is
directed to allow the claimant to withdraw
the
amount
without
producing
the
certificate from the concerned Income- Tax
Authority. The aforesaid view has been
reiterated by this High Court in Review
Application No.1 of 2020 in First Appeal
From Order No.23 of 2001 (Smt. Sudesna
and others Vs. Hari Singh and another)
while disbursing the amount.

23. In view of the above, the appeal is
partly allowed. Judgment and decree
passed by the Tribunal shall stand modified
to the aforesaid extent. The respondentInsurance Company shall deposit the
amount along with additional amount
within a period of 12 weeks from today
with interest at the rate of 7.5% from the
date of filing of the claim petition till the
amount is deposited. The amount already
deposited be deducted from the amount to
be deposited.

24.

Fresh
Award
be
drawn
accordingly in the above petition by the
tribunal as per the modification made
herein. The Tribunals in the State shall
follow the direction of this Court as herein
aforementioned as far as disbursement is
concerned, it should look into the condition
of the litigant and the pendency of the
matter and not blindly apply the judgment
of A.V. Padma (supra). The same is to be
applied looking to the facts of each case.

25. This Court is thankful to both the
counsels to see that the matter is disposed
of.
----------
(2021)09ILR A751
APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL SIDE
DATED: LUCKNOW 13.09.2021

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE RAVI NATH TILHARI, J.

F.A.F.O. No. 724 of 2018

The New India Assurance Company Ltd.
 ....Appellants
Versus
Smt. Renu & Ors. ...Respondents

Counsel for the Appellants:
Zafar Aziz, Paritosh Sharma

Counsel for the Respondents:
Deshdeepak Bajpai, Ravindra Pratap Singh
752 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
Motor
accident
Claim-challenge
to
quantum of compensation-loss of love and
affection is comprehended in loss of
consortium-no
justification
to
award
compensation towards loss of love and
affection
as
a
separate
head-total
awarded amount do not deserves to be
reduced-Motor Vehicle Act is a beneficial
legislation-amount awarded under head of
loss of love and affection is held to be also
towards "loss of consortium.

Appeal dismissed. (E-9)

List of Cases cited:

1. National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Pranay Sethi &
ors., reported in 2017 (4) TAC 673 (SC); (2017)
16 SCC 680

2. New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs Smt.
Somwati & ors. (2020) 9 SCC 644,

3. United India Insurance Co. Ltd.Vs Satinder
Kaur @ Satvinder Kaur & ors. (2020) SCC online
410

(Delivered by Hon'ble Ravi Nath Tilhari, J. )

1. Heard Sri Zafar Aziz, learned
counsel for the appellant and Sri Ravindra
Pratap Singh, learned counsel for claimantrespondent Nos. 1 to 8.

2. As per service report dated
07.05.2019, service upon respondent No. 9
is sufficient, but nobody appears on her
behalf.

3. This appeal has been filed by the
New India Assurance Company Limited
under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles
Act, 1988 ( in short "the Act, 1988")
challenging the judgment and award dated
31.07.2018 passed by the Motor Accident
Claims Tribunal/Additional District Judge,
Court No. 05, Barabanki (in short "the
Tribunal") in Claim Petition No. 29/2013 in
Re Smt. Renu and others Vs. Smt. Meena
Dixit.

4. The claimant-respondent Nos. 1 to
8
filed
claim
petition,
claiming
compensation against the owner of the
offending vehicle/opposite party No. 9 and
the Insurance Company-the appellant, on
account of death of Ayodhya Prasad
Yadav, their predecessor, in the accident
dated 05.10.2012 caused on account of rash
and negligent driving of the offending
vehicle Maruti Car No. U.P.32-CQ-0456.

5. After contest, the Tribunal vide
judgment and award dated 31.07.2018
allowed the claim petition and awarded
compensation amount of Rs. 42, 05,038/- in
total, with interest @ 7 % thereon from the
date of filing of the claim petition up to the
date of payment.

6. The Tribunal recorded finding that
the accident was caused due to rash and
negligent driving of the offending vehicle,
being driven by its driver. The offending
vehicle, at the time of accident had valid
and effective documents and was insured
with the appellant herein. The driver at the
time of accident, was having valid and
effective driving licence. Accordingly, the
compensation, as mentioned above, was
awarded in favour of the claimants.

7. The appeal was filed challenging
the award on different grounds, but at the
time of arguments Sri Zafar Aziz, learned
counsel for the appellant confines the
challenge to the quantum of compensation
awarded and that too without challenging
the findings of the Tribunal on the age and
income of the deceased. The multiplier as
applied by the Tribunal has also not been
challenged.
9 All The New India Assurance Company Ltd. Vs. Smt. Renu & Ors.
753

8. The only submission of Sri Zafar
Aziz is that the Tribunal erred in making
one- fifth (1/5th ) deduction towards the
personal and living expenses of the
deceased, which should have been onefourth (1/4th); and the amount of Rs.
15,000/- under the head of "loss of love and
affection" could not have been awarded at
all, as in view of the judgment of the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of
National Insurance Company Limited
Vs. Pranay Sethi and others, reported in
2017 (4) TAC 673 (SC); (2017) 16 SCC
680,
any
such
head,
for
grant
of
compensation is not mentioned. The
compensation could be awarded under the
conventional heads of "loss of consortium",
"loss of estate" and "funeral expenses" and
the amount under those heads could only be
awarded.

9. Sri Ravindra Pratap Singh, learned
counsel for the claimant-respondents submits
that the deduction of one- fifth (1/5th )
towards personal and living expenses of the
deceased is perfectly justified, which is as per
the law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court
in the case of Pranay Sethi (supra), as there
are 8 dependant family members of the
deceased.

10. Sri Ravindra Pratap Singh further
submits that the amount of Rs. 15,000/- has
been rightly awarded, under the head of "loss
of love and affection", as the amount of
compensation under the head of "loss of
consortium" has not been awarded to all the
claimants but to only one claimant as the
amount under the head of "loss of
consortium" is only 40,000/-. The amount of
Rs. 15,000/- awarded under the head of "loss
of love and affection" is in fact also for "loss
of consortium" to the claimants. He submits
that all the claimants would be entitled for
compensation for loss of consortium @
40,000/- per head and considering this aspect,
the award of Rs. 15,000/- though mentioned
under the head of "loss of love and affection"
need not be interfered.

11. I have considered the submissions
advanced by the learned counsels for the
parties and perused the record.

12. The points which arise for
consideration are:

i) Whether the deduction of 1/5th
made by the Tribunal towards the personal
and living expenses of the deceased is legal
or it should be one - fourth ( 1 / 4th ) ?

ii) Whether grant of compensation
of Rs. 15,000/- under the head of "loss of love
and affection" calls for any interference ?

13. So far as the first point is
concerned,
the
Tribunal
has
made
deduction of one - fifth ( 1 / 5th ) in view of
the number of dependant family members
of the deceased, being eight.

14. In the case of Pranay Sethi
(supra) the Hon'ble Supreme Court has
held as under, in paragraph 37 of SCC
report:

"37.
Before
we
proceed
to
analyse the principle for addition of future
prospects , we think it seemly to clear the
maze which is vividly reflectible from Sarla
Verma , Reshma Kumari , Rajesh and
Munna Lal Jain . Three aspects need to be
clarified . The first one pertains to
deduction towards personal and living
expenses . In paragraphs 30 , 31 and 32 ,
Sarla Verma lays down :

"30. Though in some cases the
deduction to be made towards personal and
754 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
living expenses is calculated on the basis of
units indicated in Trilok Chandra, the
general practice is to apply standardised
deductions . Having considered several
subsequent decisions of this (2003 ) 3 SLR
(R) 601 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, there is also the possibility of his
getting married in a short time, in which
event the contribution to the parent(s) and
siblings is likely to be cut drastically.
Further, subject to evidence to the
contrary, the father is likely to have his
own income and will not be considered as a
dependant and the mother alone will be
considered as a dependant. In the absence
of evidence to the contrary, brothers and
sisters
will
not
be
considered
as
dependants, because they will either be
independent and earning, or married, or be
dependent on the father.

32. Thus even if the deceased is
survived by parents and siblings, only the
mother would be considered to be a
dependant, and 50% would be treated as
the personal and living expenses of the
bachelor and 50% as the contribution to
the family. However, where the family of
the bachelor is large and dependent on the
income of the deceased, as in a case where
he has a widowed mother and large
number of younger non-earning sisters or
brothers, his personal and living expenses
may be restricted to one-third and
contribution to the family will be taken as
two-third.".

15. It has thus been clearly laid down
in Pranay Sethi (supra) that the deduction
towards personal and living expenses of the
deceased should be one-fifth (1/5th) where
the number of dependent family members
exceeds six.

16. The number of the dependents
being 8, has not been disputed by the
learned counsel for the appellant.

17. In view of the aforesaid, I do not
find any illegality in the judgment of the
Tribunal in making deduction of one - fifth
( 1 / 5th ), towards personal and living
expenses of the deceased, which is as per
the settled law.

18. Point No. 1 is answered
accordingly in terms of paragraph 17.

19. Now I proceed to consider Point
No. 2 i.e. whether grant of compensation of
Rs. 15,000/- under the head of "loss of love
and affection" calls for any interference.

20. The above aspect on the point
"loss of consortium" has been considered
by Hon'ble Supreme Court, inter alia, in the
following cases.

21. In Pranay Sethi (supra), in
paragraph 52, Hon'ble Supreme Court
has held as under:-

"52. As far as the conventional
heads are concerned, we find it difficult to
9 All The New India Assurance Company Ltd. Vs. Smt. Renu & Ors.
755
agree with the view expressed in Rajesh Vs.
Rajbir Singh (2013) 9 SCC 54. It has
granted
Rs
25.000
towards.
funeral
expenses, Rs 1,00,000 towards loss of
consortium and Rs 1,00,000 towards loss of
care and guidance for minor children. The
head relating to loss of care and minor
children does not exist. Though Rajesh
(supra) refers to Santosh Devi Vs National
Insurance Co. Ltd (2012) 6 SCC 421, it
does not seem to follow the same. The
conventional
and
traditional
heads,
needless to say, cannot be determined on
percentage basis because that would not be
an
acceptable
criterion.
Unlike
determination of income, the said heads
have to be quantified. Any quantification
must have a reasonable foundation. There
can be no dispute over the fact that price
index, fall in bank interest, escalation of
rates in many a field have to be noticed.
The court cannot remain oblivious to the
same. There has been a thumb rule in this
aspect. Otherwise, there will be extreme
difficulty in determination of the same and
unless the thumb rule is applied, there will
be immense variation lacking any kind of
consistency as a consequence of which, the
orders passed by the tribunals and courts
are likely to be unguided. Therefore, we
think it seemly to fix reasonable sums. It
seems to us that reasonable figures on
conventional heads, namely, loss of estate,
loss of consortium and funeral expenses
should be Rs 15,000, Rs 40,000 and Rs
15,000 respectively. The principle of
revisiting the said heads is an acceptable
principle. But the revisit should not be factcentric or quantum-centric. We think that it
would be condign that the amount that we
have quantified should be enhanced on
percentage basis in every three years and
the enhancement should be at the rate of
10% in a span of three years. We are
disposed to hold so because that will bring
in consistency in respect of those heads.

22. Paragraph Nos. 59 and 59.8 of
Pranay Sethi (supra) are also being
reproduced as under :

" 59. In view of the aforesaid
analysis, we proceed to record our
conclusions:

"59.8 Reasonable figures on
conventional heads, namely, loss of estate,
loss of consortium and funeral expenses
should be Rs. 15,000, Rs. 40,000 and Rs.
15,000 respectively. The aforesaid amounts
should be enhanced at the rate of 10 % in
every three years."

23. In the case of New India
Assurance Company Limited Versus
Smt. Somwati and others (2020) 9 SCC
644, the Hon'ble Supreme Court after
considering Pranay Sethi (supra) and
United
India
Insurance
Company
Limited
Vs.
Satinder
Kaur
alias
Satvinder Kaur and others (2020) SCC
online 410, held that "loss of love and
affection" is comprehended in "loss of
consortium", hence, there is no justification
to award compensation towards "loss of
love and affection" as a separate head.
Paragraph Nos. 32 and 33 of Smt.
Somwati (supra) are being reproduced as
under:

"32. A three-Judge Bench in
United India Insurance Company Ltd.
versus Satinder Kaur alias Satvinder Kaur
and others, (2020) SCC Online 410, had
reaffirmed the view of two-Judge Bench in
Magma General insurance Company Ltd.
Three-Judge Bench from paragraph 53 to
65, dealt with three conventional heads.
756 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
The entire discussion on three conventional
heads of three-Judge Bench is as follows: -

"53. In Pranay Sethi (supra), the
Constitution Bench held that in death
cases, compensation would be awarded
only under three conventional heads viz.
loss of estate, loss of consortium and
funeral expenses.

54. The Court held that the
conventional and traditional heads, cannot
be
determined
on
percentage
basis,
because that would not be an acceptable
criterion. Unlike determination of income,
the said heads have to be quantified, which
has to be based on a reasonable
foundation. It was observed that factors
such as price index, fall in bank interest,
escalation of rates, are aspects which have
to be taken into consideration. The Court
held
that
reasonable
figures
on
conventional heads, namely, loss of estate,
loss of consortium and funeral expenses
should be Rs. 15,000/-, Rs. 40,000/- and Rs.
15,000/- respectively. The Court was of the
view that the amounts to be awarded under
these
conventional
heads
should
be
enhanced by 10% every three years, which
will bring consistency in respect of these
heads.

a) Loss of Estate - Rs. 15,000 to
be awarded

b) Loss of Consortium

55. Loss of Consortium, in legal
parlance, was historically given a narrow
meaning to be awarded only to the spouse
i.e. the right of the spouse to the company,
care, help, comfort, guidance, society,
solace, affection and sexual relations with
his or her mate. The loss of companionship,
love, care and protection, etc., the spouse is
entitled to get, has to be compensated
appropriately.
The
concept
of
nonpecuniary
damage
for
loss
of
consortium is one of the major heads for
awarding
compensation
in
various
jurisdictions such as the United States of
America, Australia, etc. English courts
have recognised the right of a spouse to get
compensation even during the period of
temporary disablement.

56.
In
Magma
General
Insurance Co. Ltd. V. Nanu Ram and Ors
(supra) this Court interpreted "consortium"
to
be
a
compendious
term,
which
encompasses spousal consortium, parental
consortium, as well as filial consortium.
The right to consortium would include the
company, care, help, comfort, guidance,
solace and affection of the deceased, which
is a loss to his family. With respect to a
spouse, it would include sexual relations
with the deceased spouse.

57.
Parental
consortium
is
granted to the child upon the premature
death of a parent, for loss of parental aid,
protection, affection, society, discipline,
guidance and training.

58. Filial consortium is the right
of the parents to compensation in the case
of an accidental death of a child. An
accident leading to the death of a child
causes great shock and agony to the
parents and family of the deceased. The
greatest agony for a parent is to lose their
child during their lifetime. Children are
valued for their love and affection, and
their role in the family unit.

59. Modern jurisdictions worldover have recognized that the value of a
child's
consortium
far
exceeds
the
economic value of the compensation
awarded in the case of the death of a child.
9 All The New India Assurance Company Ltd. Vs. Smt. Renu & Ors.
757
Most jurisdictions permit parents to be
awarded compensation under loss of
consortium on the death of a child. The
amount awarded to the parents is the
compensation for loss of love and affection,
care and companionship of the deceased
child.

60. The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988
is a beneficial legislation which has been
framed with the object of providing relief to
the victims, or their families, in cases of
genuine claims. In case where a parent has
lost their minor child, or unmarried son or
daughter, the parents are entitled to be
awarded loss of consortium under the head
of Filial Consortium.

61.
Parental
Consortium
is
awarded to the children who lose the care
and protection of their parents in motor
vehicle accidents.

62. The amount to be awarded for
loss consortium will be as per the amount
fixed in Pranay Sethi (supra).

63. At this stage, we consider it
necessary to provide uniformity with
respect to the grant of consortium, and loss
of love and affection. Several Tribunals and
High
Courts
have
been
awarding
compensation for both loss of consortium
and loss of love and affection. The
Constitution
Bench
in
Pranay
Sethi
(supra),
has
recognized
only
three
conventional
heads
under
which
compensation can be awarded viz. loss of
estate, loss of consortium and funeral
expenses.

64. In Magma General (supra),
this
Court
gave
a
comprehensive
interpretation to consortium to include
spousal consortium, parental consortium,
as well as filial consortium. Loss of love
and affection is comprehended in loss of
consortium.

65. The Tribunals and High
Courts are directed to award compensation
for loss of consortium, which is a legitimate
conventional
head.
There
is
no
justification
to
award
compensation
towards loss of love and affection as a
separate head.

c) Funeral Expenses - Rs. 15,000
to be awarded"

33. The Three-Judge Bench in the
above case approved the comprehensive
interpretation given to the expression
''consortium' to include spousal consortium,
parental consortium as well as filial
consortium. Three-Judge Bench however
further laid down that ''loss of love and
affection' is comprehended in ''loss of
consortium', hence, there is no justification
to award compensation towards ''loss of
love and affection' as a separate head."

24. In Smt. Somwati (supra), the
Hon'ble
Supreme
Court
found
the
impugned
judgments
of
High
Court
awarding consortium to each of the
claimants in accordance with the law but
found no justification for award of
compensation under separate head "loss of
love and affection". It would be appropriate
to refer paragraph Nos. 37, 38 and 39 of
Smt. Somwati (supra), which are as under:

"37. Learned counsel for the
appellant has submitted that Pranay Sethi
has only referred to spousal consortium
and no other consortium was referred to in
the judgment of Pranay Sethi, hence, there
is no justification for allowing the parental
consortium and filial consortium. The
758 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
Constitution Bench in Pranay Sethi has
referred to amount of Rs.40,000/- to the
''loss of consortium' but the Constitution
Bench had not addressed the issue as to
whether consortium of Rs.40,000/- is only
payable as spousal consortium.
The
judgment of Pranay Sethi cannot be read
to mean that it lays down the proposition
that the consortium is payable only to the
wife.

38. The Three-Judge Bench in
United India Insurance Company Ltd.
(Supra) has categorically laid down that
apart from spousal consortium, parental
and filial consortium is payable. We feel
ourselves bound by the above judgment of
Three Judge Bench. We, thus, cannot
accept the submission of the learned
counsel for the appellant that the amount
of consortium awarded to each of the
claimants is not sustainable.

39. We, thus, found the impugned
judgments of the High Court awarding
consortium to each of the claimants in
accordance with law which does not
warrant any interference in this appeal.
We, however, accept the submissions of
learned counsel for the appellant that there
is
no
justification
for
award
of
compensation under separate head ''loss of
love and affection'. The appeal filed by the
appellant deserves to be allowed insofar as
the award of compensation under the head
''loss of love and affection'."

25. In view of the aforesaid
judgments it is clear that:

i)
Reasonable
figure
on
conventional heads, namely, "loss of
estate", "loss of consortium", and "funeral
expenses" should be Rs. 15,000/-, Rs.
40,000/- and Rs. 15,000/- respectively,
which amounts should be enhanced at the
rate of 10 % in every three years. [para 59.8
of Pranay Sethi (supra)].

(ii) Consortium, in legal parlance
is a compendious term which encompasses
"spousal
consortium",
"parental
consortium" and "filial consortium". The
right to consortium would include the
company, care, help, comfort, guidance,
solace and affection of the deceased, which
is a loss to his family. With respect to a
spouse, it would include sexual relations
with
the
deceased
spouse.
"Parental
consortium" is granted to the child upon the
premature death of a parent, for loss of
parental aid, protection, affection, society,
discipline, guidance and training. "Filial
consortium" is the right of the parents to
compensation in the case of an accidental
death of a child which causes great shock
and agony to the parents and family of the
deceased. [Satinder Kuar alias Satvinder
Kaur (supra)].

(iii) The judgment of Pranay
Sethi (supra) cannot be read to mean that it
lays
down
the proposition
that
the
consortium is payable only to the wife.
[para 37 of Smt. Somwati (supra)]

(iv) Grant of compensation under
the head of "loss of consortium" to all the
claimants @ 40,000/- each, was held as
according to law. [Satinder Kuar alias
Satvinder Kaur (supra)]

(v) "loss of love and affection" is
comprehended in "loss of consortium" and
hence there is no justification to award
compensation towards "loss of love and
affection" as a separate head.

26. In Smt. Somwati (supra), each of
the claimants were awarded compensation
9 All Smt. Ajay Kumari & Ors. Vs. Regional Manager of National Insurance Co. Ltd., Aligarh & Ors.
759
under the head of loss of consortium @
40,000/- each and also compensation under
separate head of "love and affection".
While
maintaining
the
grant
of
compensation to each claimant for loss of
consortium, the compensation granted
under separate head for "loss of love and
affection" was set aside.

27. In the present case, each of the
claimants
has
not
been
awarded
compensation under the head "loss of
consortium". Grant of Rs. 40,000/- only,
under the head "loss of consortium" would
be only for one dependent member of the
deceased. The compensation for "loss of
consortium" to all the claimants has not
been awarded. In view of the judgments in
Pranay Sethi (supra), Smt. Somwati (supra)
and Satinder Kaur @ Satvinder Kaur
(supra) if the compensation @ 40,000/- to
all the 8 claimants had been awarded, the
total amount of compensation would have
been on the much higher side than the
awarded amount. Although the claimants
have not filed any appeal for enhancement
of the amount of compensation by grant of
compensation to all the claimants under
"loss of consortium" but considering the
aforesaid fact and also that Motor Vehicles
Act is a beneficial legislation, the total
awarded amount deserves not be reduced
and the amount of Rs. 15,000/- awarded
under the head of loss of love and affection
is held to be also towards "loss of
consortium".

28. If, all the claimants had been
awarded compensation under "loss of
consortium" and also under separate head
of "loss of love and affection" the matter
would have been otherwise.

29. On point No.2 it is held that the
grant of compensation of Rs. 15,000/- shall
also be towards "loss of consortium". The
award does not call for interference with
respect to that amount of Rs. 15,000/-.

30. The appeal is dismissed.
----------
(2021)09ILR A759
APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 10.08.2021

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE DR. KAUSHAL JAYENDRA
THAKER, J.
THE HON'BLE SUBHASH CHAND, J.

F.A.F.O. No. 1274 of 2020

Smt. Ajay Kumari & Ors. ...Appellants
Versus
Regional Manager of National Insurance
Co. Ltd., Aligarh & Ors. ...Respondents

Counsel for the Appellants:
Sri A.T. Pandey

Counsel for the Respondents:

Income of deceased divided into two partRs. 87,216 for 6 months when the sugar
mill was operational -Rs. 43, 608 for 6
onths when the mill was closed-and the su
of the two parts were divided by two-badnet income has to be calculated-Rs.
87,216 and Rs. 43, 608 has to be added.

Grant of future loss of income should also
be added-Tribunal has deducted income
tax-GPF, insurance, gratuity-could not be
deducted as net salary of the deceased
was non taxable income at the time of
accident-amount modified-enhanced.

Appeal partly allowed. (E-9)

Held, The deceased or the person concerned
should be shown to have contributed either to
the accident and the impact of accident upon