# THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED v. SMT. SOMWATI AND OTHERS

- **Citation:** [2020] 10 S.C.R. 1132
- **Court:** Supreme Court of India
- **Decided:** 2020-09-07
- **Case number:** Civil Appeal No. 3093 of 2020
- **Bench:** Ashok Bhushan, R. Subhash Reddy
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/supreme-court-of-india/the-new-india-assurance-company-limited-v-smt-somwati-and-others-34342
- **Pages:** 19

## Headnote

Motor Vehicles - Accident - Claims - Compensation -
Consortium - Appeals filed by Insurance Companies questioning
the judgments of the High Courts arising out of the award by MACT
with regard to the compensation awarded in favour of the claimants
under two heads, i.e. 'loss of consortium' and 'loss of love and
affection' - The appellants submitted that the amount granted under
the head 'loss of love and affection' is wholly without jurisdiction
and that National Insurance Company Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi and Ors.
has only referred to spousal consortium and no other consortium,
hence, there is no justification for allowing the parental consortium
and filial consortium - Held: The 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 a 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 - Further, the Three Judges Bench in United India Insurance
Company Ltd. has categorically laid down that apart from spousal
consortium, parental and filial consortium is payable - It was 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
lead - Thus, the impugned judgments of the High Courts awarding
consortium to each of the claimants in accordance with law which
does not warrant any interference - However, the submission of the
appellant that there is no justification for award of compensation
under separate head 'loss of love and affection' is accepted.
Partly allowing the appeals, the Court
HELD: 1. 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
[2020] 10 S.C.R. 1132
1132
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
1133
Bench in Magma General Insurance Company Ltd.. The ThreeJudge 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. [Paras 33 and
34][1044-H; 1047-C-D]
2. The Constitution Bench in Pranay Sethi has also not
under conventional head included any compensation towards 'loss
of love and affection' which have been now further reiterated by
three-Judge Bench in United India Insurance Company Ltd.. It
is thus now authoritatively well settled that no compensation can
be awarded under the head 'loss of love and affection'. [Para 35]
[1047-D-E]
3. The 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 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. [Para 38][1148-E-F]
4. The Three-Judge Bench in United India Insurance
Company Ltd. has categorically laid down that apart from spousal
consortium, parental and filial consortium is payable. This Court
feel itself bound by the above judgment of Three Judge Bench.
This Court, thus, cannot accept the submission of the appellant
that the amount of consortium awarded to each of the claimants
is not sustainable. [Pa

## Text

_Characters 0–39,929 of 43,192. This is a partial read: ask again with offset=39929 for what follows._

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
1132
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2020] 10 S.C.R.
THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED
v.
SMT. SOMWATI AND OTHERS
(Civil Appeal No. 3093 of 2020)
SEPTEMBER 07, 2020
[ASHOK BHUSHAN AND R. SUBHASH REDDY, JJ.]
Motor Vehicles - Accident - Claims - Compensation -
Consortium - Appeals filed by Insurance Companies questioning
the judgments of the High Courts arising out of the award by MACT
with regard to the compensation awarded in favour of the claimants
under two heads, i.e. 'loss of consortium' and 'loss of love and
affection' - The appellants submitted that the amount granted under
the head 'loss of love and affection' is wholly without jurisdiction
and that National Insurance Company Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi and Ors.
has only referred to spousal consortium and no other consortium,
hence, there is no justification for allowing the parental consortium
and filial consortium - Held: The 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 a 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 - Further, the Three Judges Bench in United India Insurance
Company Ltd. has categorically laid down that apart from spousal
consortium, parental and filial consortium is payable - It was 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
lead - Thus, the impugned judgments of the High Courts awarding
consortium to each of the claimants in accordance with law which
does not warrant any interference - However, the submission of the
appellant that there is no justification for award of compensation
under separate head 'loss of love and affection' is accepted.
Partly allowing the appeals, the Court
HELD: 1. 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
[2020] 10 S.C.R. 1132
1132
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
1133
Bench in Magma General Insurance Company Ltd.. The ThreeJudge 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. [Paras 33 and
34][1044-H; 1047-C-D]
2. The Constitution Bench in Pranay Sethi has also not
under conventional head included any compensation towards 'loss
of love and affection' which have been now further reiterated by
three-Judge Bench in United India Insurance Company Ltd.. It
is thus now authoritatively well settled that no compensation can
be awarded under the head 'loss of love and affection'. [Para 35]
[1047-D-E]
3. The 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 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. [Para 38][1148-E-F]
4. The Three-Judge Bench in United India Insurance
Company Ltd. has categorically laid down that apart from spousal
consortium, parental and filial consortium is payable. This Court
feel itself bound by the above judgment of Three Judge Bench.
This Court, thus, cannot accept the submission of the appellant
that the amount of consortium awarded to each of the claimants
is not sustainable. [Para 39][1148-G]
5. This Court 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. This Court, however, accept the submissions of the
THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED v. SMT.
SOMWATI AND OTHERS
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
1134
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2020] 10 S.C.R.
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'.
[Para 40][1148-H; 1149-A]
General Manager Kerala State Road Transport
Corporation, Trivandrum v. Susamma Thomas (Mrs) and
Others (1994) 2 SCC 176; Sarla Verma (Smt) and
Others v. Delhi Transport Corporation and Another
(2009) 6 SCC 121 : [2009] 5 SCR 1098; United India
Insurance Company Ltd. v. Satinder Kaur alias
Satvinder Kaur and Others (2020) SCC Online SC 410
- relied on.
Magma General Insurance Company ltd. v. Nanu Ram
@ Chuhru Ram and Ors. (2018) 18 SCC 130; National
Insurance Company Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi and Others,
(2017) 16 SCC 680 : [2017] 13 SCR 100; Sangita Arya
and Others v. Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. and
Others (2020) SCC Online SC 513; M.H.Uma
Maheshwari and Others v. United India Insurance
Company Ltd. (2020) 6 SCC 400 - referred to.
Case Law Reference
(2018) 18 SCC 130
referred to
Para 7
[2017] 13 SCR 100
referred to
Para 15
(1994) 2 SCC 176
relied on
Para 24
[2009] 5 SCR 1098
relied on
Para 26
(2020) 6 SCC 400
referred to
Para 44
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 3093
Of 2020.
From the Judgment and Order dated 25.02.2019 of the High Court
of Judicature at Allahabad, in First Appeal from order No. 1894 of 2003.
WITH
Civil Appeal Nos. 3094, 3095, 3096, 3097, 3098, 3099 Of 2020.
Pankaj Seth, Ms. Manjeet Chawla, Sudhir Naagar, Rohit Kumar
Sinha, T. Mahipal, Nishant Singh, Abhishek Kumar Singh, Sunil Kumar
Verma, V. N. Raghupathy, Advs. for the appearing parties.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
1135
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
ASHOK BHUSHAN, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. These appeals raising common questions of law have been
heard together and are being decided by this common judgment. For
deciding these appeals, it is sufficient to notice the facts in detail in Civil
Appeal No. 3093/2020(arising out of SLP(C) No.23478 of 2019),
New India Assurance Company Limited Versus Smt. Somwati and
Others and brief facts in other appeals.
3. All these appeals have been filed by three Insurance Companies,
i.e., New India Assurance Company Limited, Cholamandalam
MS General Insurance Company Ltd. and The Oriental Insurance
Company Ltd. questioning the judgments of the High Courts arising out
of the award by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT) with regard
to the compensation awarded in favour of the claimants under two heads,
i.e., "Loss of Consortium" and "loss of love and affection."
Civil Appeal NO. 3093/2020(arising out of SLP(C)No.23478
of 2019), New India Assurance Company Limited versus Smt.
Somwati and Others
4. Ram Jiyawan, the husband of Smt. Somwati died in a Motor
Vehicle accident on 06.12.2001 leaving behind his widow Smt. Somwati
and seven minor children. Claim petition No.7 of 2002 was filed under
Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, claiming compensation of
Rs.15,25,000/-. The MACT by award dated 22.03.2003 allowed a claim
of Rs. 1,67,000/- with 9% interest. An appeal was filed by Smt. Somwati
Devi and others in the High Court being F.A.F.O.No.1894 of 2003. The
High Court allowed the appeal of the claimants and awarded a
compensation of Rs.12,54,000/-. Against the judgment of the High Court
dated 25.02.2019, this appeal has been filed by the Insurance Company.
The grant of compensation under two heads has been challenged in this
appeal, i.e., item No. (vi) and (viii), which are to the following effect:-
"(vi)Loss of love and affection= Rs.4,00,000/-(Rs.50,000/- to each
of the eight claimants).
(viii) Loss of Parental Consortium to claimant/appellant nos.2 to
8= Rs.2,80,000/-(Rs.40,000/- to each of the claimants)."
5. This Court while issuing notice on 24.04.2019 passed following
order:-
THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED v. SMT.
SOMWATI AND OTHERS
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
1136
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2020] 10 S.C.R.
"O R D E R
Delay condoned.
Issue notice returnable in four weeks limited to the issue
whether both consortium and loss of love and affection could have
been awarded by the High Court in this case.
Dasti service, in addition, is permitted.
Until further orders, there shall be stay of 2 payment of the
compensation amount payable to the claimants towards clause
(vi) of the impugned judgment which reads as under :
"Loss of love and affection=Rs. 4,00,000/- (Rs. 50,000/- to
each of the eight claimants)"
6. In pursuance of notice issued by this Court, the respondents
have appeared and filed reply as well as written submissions.
Civil Appeal No. 3094/2020(arising out of SLP(C)No.4801
of 2020), New India Assurance Company Limited Versus Sangita
Devi and Others
7. Sanjay Kumar, husband of the respondent Sangeeta Devi died
of Motor Vehicle accident on 12.01.2015. Claim Petition bearing MACP
No.862 of 2016 was filed by the respondents, which claim petition was
allowed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, granting a compensation of
Rs.17,71,000/- with interest of 9%. Claimants filed an appeal in the High
Court. The High Court following the judgment of this Court in Magma
General Insurance Company ltd. Versus Nanu Ram @ Chuhru Ram
and Ors., (2018) 18 SCC 130, granted compensation for 'loss of love
and affection' at the rate of Rs.50,000/- to each of eight claimants and
similarly, under the head 'Loss of consortium' at the rate of Rs.40,000/-
to all the eight claimants. Aggrieved by the judgment of the Delhi High
Court, Insurance Company has filed appeal challenging the order of the
High Court.
Civil Appeal No. 3095/2020(arising out of SLP(C)No.4643
of 2020), New India Assurance Company Limited Versus Azmati
Khatoon and Others
8. Mohd. Hasibul Bassan, died in a Motor Vehicle accident on
29.10.2007. Claim Petition was filed by respondents which has been
allowed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal granting a compensation of
Rs.17,32,776/- with interest. The appellant filed an appeal in the High
Court. The High Court granted compensation under the head 'loss of
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
1137
love and affection' at the rate of Rs.50,000/- to each seven claimants
and Rs.40,000/- each to seven claimants under the head 'loss of
consortium'. Aggrieved by the judgment of the Delhi High Court,
Insurance Company is in appeal.
Civil Appeal No. 3096/2020 (arising out of SLP(C)No.5441
of 2020), Cholamandalam Ms General Insurance Company
Limited Versus Umarani and Others
9. The deceased Krishnasamy met with a vehicular accident on
07.09.2014 who subsequently died. Claim petition was filed by the
respondents which has been allowed by Motor Vehicle Accident
Compensation Tribunal granting compensation of Rs.13,60,000/-. Appeal
was filed by the Insurance Company. The award under the head 'loss of
consortium', an amount of Rs.One Lakh and award under the head
'loss of love and affection' an amount of Rs. Three Lakhs was confirmed
by the High Court, which is challenged by Insurance Company in this
appeal.
Civil Appeal No. 3097/2020(arising out of SLP(C)No.6381
of 2020),New India Assurance Company Limited Versus Smt.
Pinki and Others
10. One Dinesh Kumar met with a motor vehicle accident on
11.06.2014 and died. Claim Petition filed by the respondents was allowed
by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal granting an amount of
Rs.13,01,776/-. Claimants filed an appeal before the High Court which
enhanced the compensation. The High Court granted compensation under
the head 'loss of love and affection' Rs.50,000/- each to four claimants
and under the head 'loss of consortium' at the rate of Rs.40,000/- each
to four claimants. Aggrieved by the judgment of the High Court, Insurance
Company is in this appeal.
Civil Appeal No. 3098/2020(arising out of SLP(C)No.7556
of 2020), New India Assurance Company Limited Versus Nanak
Chand and Others
11. Gaurav died in a motor vehicle accident on 23.09.2010. Claim
petition was filed by the parents of the deceased, which was allowed
granting compensation of Rs.4,83,348/-. Claimants filed an appeal in the
High Court which was allowed. The High Court granted compensation
of Rs.50,000/- each to both the claimants under the head 'loss of love
and affection' and Rs.40,000/- each to both the claimants under the
THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED v. SMT.
SOMWATI AND OTHERS [ASHOK BHUSHAN, J.]
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
1138
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2020] 10 S.C.R.
head 'loss of consortium'. Aggrieved by the judgment of the High Court,
this appeal has been filed.
Civil Appeal No. 3099/2020(arising out of SLP(C)No.8250
of 2020),The Oriental Insurance Company Limited Versus Smt.
Rinku Devi and Others
12. Birbal Kumar met with an accident on 27.07.2008 resulting in
his death. Claim petition filed by the respondents claiming Rs.Twenty
lakhs was allowed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal granting
compensation of Rs.5,80,000/-. Insurance company filed an appeal. The
Tribunal has awarded filial consortium at the rate of Rs.40,000/- to each
of the claimants, i.e., wife, two children and father totaling
Rs.1,60,000/-. The High Court in the appeal filed by the Insurance
Company further enhanced the compensation under the head 'loss of
love and affection' at the rate of Rs.50,000/- to each of four claimants,
i.e., enhancing total amount by Rs. Two Lakhs. Insurance Company
aggrieved by the judgment of the High Court has come up with this
appeal.
13. We have heard learned counsel for the appellant as well as
learned counsel for the claimants.
14. In all the appeals, only issue to be considered is with regard to
award of compensation to the claimant under two heads, i.e., (a)loss of
consortium and (b) loss of love and affection. With regard to 'consortium',
the question is as to whether it is only the wife who is entitled for
consortium or the consortium can be awarded to children and parents
also.
15. Learned counsel for the appellants contends that the
Constitution Bench of this Court in National Insurance Company Ltd.
Versus Pranay Sethi and Others, (2017) 16 SCC 680, has laid down
that there are only three conventional heads namely (i)'loss of estate',
(ii)'loss of consortium' and (iii)'funeral expenses', for which the amount
determined by the Constitution Bench is Rs.15,000/-, Rs.40,000/- and
Rs.15,000/- respectively. Thus, the total amount under conventional head
was Rs.70,000/- and the amount under conventional heads could not
exceed Rs.70,000/-.
16. It is submitted that the amount granted under the head 'loss of
love and affection' is wholly without jurisdiction and further amount
granted under the head 'consortium' could not be more than
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
1139
Rs.40,000/- and the amount of 'consortium' is only payable to wife who
is entitled to Rs.40,000/- and the Tribunals and the High Courts committed
error in awarding amount of consortium to each of the claimant, i.e.,
wife, children and parents.
17. It is submitted that even after the Constitution Bench Judgment,
this Court has allowed amounts under conventional heads as 'loss of
state' Rs.15,000/-, 'consortium' Rs.40,000/- and 'funeral expenses'
Rs.15,000/-. It is submitted that after the judgment of Pranay Sethi, this
Court had confined the payment under conventional heads as per
judgment of Pranay Sethi, the impugned judgment of the High Court
awarding compensation under the head 'loss of love and affection' as
well as 'consortium' to each of the claimant is contrary to the law laid
down by this Court and has to be set aside.
18. An additional submission has been made by learned counsel
appearing for the appellant in The Oriental Insurance Company ltd.
Versus Smt. Rinku Devi and others. Learned counsel submits that
although MACT has erred in allowing consortium to four claimants at
the rate of Rs.40,000/- but the High Court in the appeal filed by the
Insurance Company further enhanced the compensation under the head
'loss of love and affection'. The compensation could not have been
enhanced on the appeal filed by the insurance company when the
claimants have not filed an appeal. Learned counsel further submits that
the High Court further committed an error in directing the statutory amount
deposited by the appellant along with the appeal to be deposited in
AASRA fund opened in Delhi High Court which ought not to have been
directed since the appellant has raised substantial questions of law and
the appeal deserves to be allowed.
19. Learned counsel appearing for the claimants refuting the
submissions of counsel for the appellant contends that the award to each
of the claimants at the rate of Rs.40,000/- under the head 'consortium'
is in accordance with law laid down by this Court. It is submitted that the
award of compensation under the head 'consortium' cannot be given a
narrow interpretation. The amount under the head 'consortium' has rightly
been given not only to wife but children and parents. Learned counsel
for the claimant has supported the judgments of the High Court.
20. Learned counsel for the parties have also placed reliance on
various judgments of this Court, which shall be referred to while
considering the submissions in detail.
THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED v. SMT.
SOMWATI AND OTHERS [ASHOK BHUSHAN, J.]
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
1140
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2020] 10 S.C.R.
21. We have considered the submission of the learned counsel for
the parties and have perused the record.
22. The expression 'compensation' is a comprehensive term which
includes a claim for the damages. Compensation is by way of atonement
for the injury caused.
23. The claimant in a claim for award of compensation under
Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, is entitled for just compensation.
The just compensation has to be equitable and fair. The loss of life and
limb can never be compensated in an equal measure but the statutory
provisions under Motor Vehicles Act is a social piece of legislation which
has been enacted with intent and object to facilitate the claimants to get
redress for the loss of the member of family, compensate the loss in
some measure and to compensate the claimant to a reasonable extent.
24. We may refer to the judgment of this Court in General
Manager Kerala State Road Transport Corporation, Trivandrum
Versus Susamma Thomas(Mrs) and others, (1994) 2 SCC 176. This
court considering the concept of compensation under Motor Vehicle Act,
1939, laid down following in paragraph 5:-
"5....The determination of the quantum must answer what
contemporary society "would deem to be a fair sum such as would
allow the wrongdoer to hold up his head among his among his
neighbours and say with their approval that he has done the fair
thing". The amount awarded must not be niggardly since the "law
values life and limb in a free society in generous scales". All this
means that the sum awarded must be fair and reasonable by
accepted legal standards."
25. In the above case also, this Court awarded the amount under
the conventional head of 'loss of consortium'.
26. Another judgment which needs to be noted is the judgment of
this Court in Sarla Verma (Smt) and Others Versus Delhi Transport
Corporation and Another, (2009) 6 SCC 121, in which judgment in
paragraph 16, this Court while elaborating the "just compensation" laid
down following: -
"5...."Just compensation is adequate compensation which
is fair and equitable, on the facts and circumstances of the case,
to make good the loss suffered as a result of the wrong, as far as
money can do so, by applying the well-settled principles relating
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
1141
to award of compensation. It is not intended to be a bonanza,
largesse or source of profit."
27. This court also awarded an amount under the head 'loss of
consortium' to the wife.
28. We need to notice the Constitution Bench judgment in National
Insurance Company Ltd.(supra) which case notices the earlier
judgments of this Court where compensation was awarded towards loss
of consortium. In paragraph 46, the following was laid down: -
"46. Another aspect which has created confusion pertains to grant
of loss of estate, loss of consortium and funeral expenses. In
Santosh Devi, the two-Judge Bench followed the traditional method
and granted Rs.5000/- for transportation of the body, Rs.10,000/-
as funeral expenses and Rs.10,000/- as regards the loss of
consortium. In Sarla Verma, the Court granted Rs.5000/- under
the head of loss of estate, Rs.5000/- towards funeral expenses
and Rs.10,000/- towards loss of consortium. In Rajesh (2013) 9
SCC 54, the Court granted Rs.1,00,000/- towards loss of
consortium and Rs.25,000/- towards funeral expenses. It also
granted Rs.1,00,000/- towards loss of care and guidance for minor
children. The Court enhanced the same on the principle that a
formula framed to achieve uniformity and consistency on a socioeconomic issue has to be contrasted from a legal principle and
ought to be periodically revisited as has been held in Santosh Devi
(2012) 6 SCC 421. On the principle of revisit, it fixed different
amount on conventional heads. What weighed with the Court is
factum of inflation and the price index. It has also been moved by
the concept of loss of consortium. We are inclined to think so, for
what it states in that regard. We quote: (Rajesh case):-
"17...In legal parlance, "consortium" is the right of the
spouse to the company, care, help, comfort, guidance, society,
solace, affection and sexual relations with his or her mate.
That non-pecuniary head of damages has not been properly
understood by our courts. The loss of companionship, love,
care and protection, etc., the spouse is entitled to get, has to be
compensated appropriately. The concept of non-pecuniary
damage for loss of consortium is one of the major heads of
award of compensation in other parts of the world more
particularly in the United States of America, Australia, etc.
THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED v. SMT.
SOMWATI AND OTHERS [ASHOK BHUSHAN, J.]
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
1142
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2020] 10 S.C.R.
English courts have also recognised the right of a spouse to
get compensation even during the period of temporary
disablement. By loss of consortium, the courts have made an
attempt to compensate the loss of spouse's affection, comfort,
solace, companionship, society, assistance, protection, care and
sexual relations during the future years. Unlike the
compensation awarded in other countries and other jurisdictions,
since the legal heirs are otherwise adequately compensated
for the pecuniary loss, it would not be proper to award a major
amount under this head. Hence, we are of the view that it
would only be just and reasonable that the courts award at
least rupees one lakh for loss of consortium.""
29. In paragraph 52, the Constitution Bench opined that reasonable
figures on conventional head namely 'loss of estate', 'loss of consortium'
and 'funeral expenses' should be Rs.15,000/-, Rs.40,000/- and Rs.15,000/
- respectively. In paragraph 52, following has been laid down: -
"52. As far as the conventional heads are concerned, we
find it difficult to agree with the view expressed in Rajesh. It has
granted Rs. 25,000/- towards funeral expenses, Rs. 1,00,000/-
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 refers to Santosh
Devi, 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/-,
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
1143
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 fact-centric 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."
30. In paragraph 59.8, the Court further held that the amount of
conventional head should be enhanced at the rate of 10% every three
year. In paragraph 59.8, following was held:-
"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."
31. The next judgment which needs to be noted is Magma General
Insurance Company Limited versus Nanu Ram alias Chuhru Ram
and others, (2018) 18 SCC 130, the concept of consortium was
explained in paragraphs 21,22 and 23 which are as follows: -
"21. A Constitution Bench of this Court in Pranay Sethi
(supra) dealt with the various heads under which compensation is
to be awarded in a death case. One of these heads is Loss of
Consortium. In legal parlance, "consortium" 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.
21.1. Spousal consortium is generally defined as rights pertaining
to the relationship of a husband-wife which allows compensation
to the surviving spouse for loss of "company, society, cooperation,
affection, and aid of the other in every conjugal relation."
21.2. 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."
THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED v. SMT.
SOMWATI AND OTHERS [ASHOK BHUSHAN, J.]
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
1144
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2020] 10 S.C.R.
21.3. 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, affection, companionship and their role in the family unit.
22. Consortium is a special prism reflecting changing norms about
the status and worth of actual relationships. Modern jurisdictions
world over 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. Most jurisdictions therefore permit
parents to be awarded compensation under loss of consortium on
the death of a child. The amount awarded to the parents is a
compensation for loss of the love, affection, care and
companionship of the deceased child.
23. The Motor Vehicles Act is a beneficial legislation aimed at
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. Parental
Consortium is awarded to children who lose their parents in motor
vehicle accidents under the Act. A few High Courts have awarded
compensation on this count. However, there was no clarity with
respect to the principles on which compensation could be awarded
on loss of Filial Consortium."
32. A two-Judge Bench in Magma General Insurance Company
Limited awarded the amount of Rs.40,000/- to father and sister of the
deceased. Paragraph 24 is as follows: -
"24. The amount of compensation to be awarded as consortium
will be governed by the principles of awarding compensation under
'Loss of Consortium' as laid down in Pranay Sethi (supra). In the
present case, we deem it appropriate to award the father and the
sister of the deceased, an amount of Rs. 40,000 each for loss of
Filial Consortium."
33. 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
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
1145
Magma General insurance Company Ltd. Three-Judge Bench from
paragraph 53 to 65, dealt with three conventional heads. 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 & Ors.,
12 this Court interpreted "consortium" to be a compendious term,
which encompasses spousal consortium, parental consortium, as
THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED v. SMT.
SOMWATI AND OTHERS [ASHOK BHUSHAN, J.]
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
1146
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2020] 10 S.C.R.
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 world-over 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. 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.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
1147
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"
34. 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.
35. The Constitution Bench in Pranay Sethi has also not under
conventional head included any compensation towards 'loss of love and
affection' which have been now further reiterated by three-Judge Bench
in United India Insurance Company Ltd.(supra). It is thus now
authoritatively well settled that no compensation can be awarded under
the head 'loss of love and affection'.
36. The word 'consortium' has been defined in Black's law
Dictionary, 10th edition. The Black's law dictionary also simultaneously
notices the filial consortium, parental consortium and spousal consortium
in following manner:-
"Consortium 1. The benefits that one person, esp. A spouse, is
entitled to receive from another, including companionship,
cooperation, affection, aid, financial support, and (between spouses)
sexual relations a claim for loss of consortium.
•
Filial consortium A child's society, affection, and
companionship given to a parent.
•
Parental consortium A parent's society, affection and
companionship given to a child.
•
Spousal consortium A spouse's society, affection and
companionship given to the other spouse."
THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED v. SMT.
SOMWATI AND OTHERS [ASHOK BHUSHAN, J.]
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
1148
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2020] 10 S.C.R.
37. The Magma General Insurance Company Ltd.(Supra) as
well as United India Insurance Company ltd.(Supra), Three-Judge
Bench laid down that the consortium is not limited to spousal consortium
and it also includes parental consortium as well as filial consortium. In
paragraph 87 of United India Insurance Company Ltd. (supra),
'consortium' to all the three claimants was thus awarded. Paragraph 87
is quoted below:-
"87. Insofar as the conventional heads are concerned, the deceased
Satpal Singh left behind a widow and three children as his
dependants. On the basis of the judgments in Pranay Sethi (supra)
and Magma General (supra), the following amounts are awarded
under the conventional heads:-
i) Loss of Estate: Rs. 15,000
ii) Loss of Consortium:
a) Spousal Consortium: Rs. 40,000
b) Parental Consortium: 40,000 x 3 = Rs. 1,20,000
iii) Funeral Expenses: Rs. 15,000"
38. 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 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.
39. 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.
40. 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,
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
1149
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'.
41. We may also notice Three-Judge Bench judgment of this Court
relied by learned counsel for the appellant i.e. Sangita Arya and others
versus Oriental Insurance Company ltd. and others, (2020) SCC
Online 513. Counsel for the appellant submits that this Court has granted
only Rs.40,000/- towards 'loss of consortium' which is an indication that
'consortium' cannot be granted to children. In the above case, Motor
Accident Claims Tribunal has awarded Rs.20,000/- to the widow towards
loss of consortium and Rs.10,000/- to the minor daughter towards 'loss
of love and affection'. The High Court has reduced the amount of
consortium from Rs.20,000/- to Rs.10,000/-. Paragraph 16 of the judgment
is to the following effect: -
"16. The consortium payable to the widow was reduced by the
High Court from Rs. 20,000 (as awarded by the MACT) to
Rs.10,000; the amount awarded towards loss of love and affection
to the minor daughters was reduced from Rs.10,000 to Rs. 5,000.
However, the amount of Rs.