Simla Devi v. Jai Singh



    
        














"#$#%& ' '  




     
 


 







 

 (&  )* ('

+

 , -+ * 






!

"
 



#


!

"
 


$%& 
' ( )))) , -+ *.

'

*  


"


*


"




 
"  "!
"
 

+%+,+++

#!
 
!!

'
-. 
/ 


!


"
 +0 +++1
 
! 
 #
 

( 

.


"



"


 
-
 (

#!
 
"
!  





 



#
!





 1!  






 
 
 


"

'
, 

! 
"
 1! 

.



,



!
-. 

! 

(
"


 3++1
 
 
# 

 
 
 
!











.

4%+1
 
 
&

" .



 
"
567




#!

  

#
 !



#
,+
( 
"




 
#!






587
&






-. 

.



! 
 (
.

"
"
"
 !


  




"
9+:
"

(



.

;

  !  

!! 
"
"
 !
&






!

 
 

 
"
 %, +++1



#!
# !

"

"


<



# 


"
! 
&
 .



 
"
93++1

!! 
"
"


<


 .



#!

 = 
&

" 
.



.
"







 1! 








  !


"
, 89 6431
&






 
.

 


 1! 
 #
 
>
0:
 



&
 "
 



 

! 
"
 

 


#  #
.(

* ?.

'

! 






         
 

  

 

  !  "  
   
 


# 
$


%&' 

   ! 

(  (  
 


$ $
)

@ "
"
 

!

.

.

 



"
#!

.

  !

 # "Death Case

% Deceased :

Harpal (unmarried) Age :

Date of Accident :

20/10/1998 Total Claimants :

2 (Parents) Award :

Rs.1,09,000/'

Salary :

Rs.1730 x 12 = Rs.20,760/'

Multiplier :

Rs.20,760 x 18 = Rs.3,73,680/'

Deduction :

Rs.3,73,680 ' 1⁄2 = Rs.1,86,840/'

Future Prospects :

40% of Rs.1,86,840 = Rs.2,61,576/'

Conventional Heads :

Rs. 1,32,000 [Rs.48,000 x 2 = Rs. 96000 Loss of Consortium] [Rs.18,000 - Loss of Estate] [Rs.18,000 - Funeral Expenses] ___________________ Rs.3,93,576/'

___________________ Difference :

Rs.3,93,576 ' Rs.1,09,000 = Rs.2,84,576/'"

% 

! 
  
"
 


$%& 

' (

 



.



 


.

!

.(
 

(
<!



 



; 


"
"
 !

!

 
 


"


 (
>
3:
 




#



 
  9 -
'

 
 

! 
"

 


 



'



"

 



 



!


!!
#
#



.



 (



"
 
#!
 = 
 A !
.(

' 6 * 7.

'


9,
"

* BC

.




"We therefore hold that the multiplier to be used should

9 be as mentioned in column (4) of the Table above (prepared by applying Susamma Thomas, Trilok Chandra and Charlie), which starts with an operative multiplier of $ + & & +,  and 21 to 25 years), reduced by one unit for every five years, that is M'17 for 26 to 30 years, M'16 for 31 to 35 years, M'15 for 36 to 40 years, M'14 for 41 to 45 years, and M'13 for 46 to 50 years, then reduced by two units for every five years, that is, M'11 for 51 to 55 years, M'9 for 56 to 60 years, M'7 for 61 to 65 years and M'5 for 66 to 70 years." 3 
 
"

.

#
#

"


"
,+
(   
"
587


.



 4 -
* 7.

'

%&' 

   ! *


" 
.


 
!






"

"
! 




"







.


"
! 





"
"
! 


!









! 
-

# #
 ! 


.




 



"


A 


  !

 .

# "21. A Constitution Bench of this Court in Pranay Sethi 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.

 
          &   +     &    &    + - .+..

6      // & ++0  12  1++  1 +   / & 

  "    &      

     +     1  +    +  0   1    1  ++  1   1   1  &     

  & 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.

% 5 - +&   / &+  /  +1 + &

  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. "    .  .     / 

 5

5 +.6&  /.    

5.

However, there was no clarity with respect to the principles on

3 which compensation could be awarded on loss of Filial Consortium.

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." 8 &
.


A 



 
"
9+ +++1
!
# #



" 


 
"




 
"

! 
#

#
 



 .


"

! 1 
 



 0 &
.

!

(
"
4%+1
 
 

( .

;

 
!  

 
"
587


.

( 



#



.

,+
( 
"
 
-
"
 !
 # 


!

 
 
#!







!




!!
#
#


'
! 

(
# 
>
46:
 
 


 
 
.
 #
"







 "
"

 


$%& 
' (



""

!



"
"
 !
"
!

 
 



.

;

.(
 


'

"

 





!


>
4:
 



#
  + /

 
 #

.


"!


!! 





 

(
#





+%+,+++
  "

 


$%& 
' (

 !


(


 
 
"
!






"
, 89 6431



 1! 
 
#
 



"
4:
 



"

4  
"
" 
"

!
 

 
"
!
(


#  
"
<
#

;
"
 (





.

 !


/0#1 .

  , -+ * naresh.k



  
 ; 1 

  
 .

$