Veero Devi And ORS v. Ajay And ORS
!"
# $% & ' (' )
!"
$!*!+*, - * &.' (' ) /0!
1 1 !*& )' ' ) Whether only the operative part of the judgment is pronounced? No Whether full judgment is pronounced?
Yes & 23
4'
4 4
4
! "#$
% & ''''
4
4
'
( )
*
++ ,( +,(-
* &
)*% . %
(// (0--1
2 )*% 34
5 %
"0,6-+75# 869
% % %
.% % % (6 ,+ +,(6 +
%
:% %
* )*%
:% * % ; *
4
3 43 4 "
) %
#
%
* )*%
*
) *
*
< %
! "#$
% &
% %
= %
)*%
* %
*
5
*
*
)
% * )*% = % %*
! "#$
% &
FAO No. 4269"2018 titled as New India Assurance Co. Ltd vs. Veero Devi and others, :% %
* )*% )
* % / $ %
% 43 35
4
= 3* % &% Sarla Verma Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and Another 6 7
) 4+/$ - !+$ # # 8
%
#
( >30
!"#$
%# !"&$
&' !"($
31)
* (+,
-
$ . /
*
32
(+,
(+,
* * * * * * 42. )
&$ 0
1 $ !2 !(%+ %!
%(
$
3 !4 %'#+
3 !'#!#(
3 !(#'&+
3 !&&!&(
3 !#&'(+
3 !!(!((
3 5(''+
3 4'!'(
3 (''4+
- = 3*% &% National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi & Ors. 6
) 4 ) 8
%
(//(/"#
(/- (0--
# 14 %
?
%
@ 1A4 %
@
.
1&4 * %@ 14 * %
%
% ?
@ 1B4 C%%
*@ # ? ) %
% %
# >52. 6 conventional heads
7/
8*
7 %(+++
7 !+++++
7 !+++++
7/
0 9
:
6
;
*
7 !(+++ 7 &++++ 7 !(+++
) <
)
!+,
)
= = = = = 59.3)
(+,
/
&+
#+,
&+ (+
*
(+ '+
!(,6
59.4*
$
&+,
&+
6 %(,
&+(+
!+,
(+'+
59.5.
#+#%0> ?
59.6.
0> @ &%/
59.7
59.87
!(+++ 7 &++++ 7 !(+++
!+,
A = 3*% &%
9-
* $
*#+$ *, !-/ *:
3;-; 1 <#'
*+ -
0;
# =+=$+ - = $# 6
4 ( 8
4 $0
< $- #+/$
$ * :
4 =;
4+/$
%
%
%
# B216 <
C 0 8
;
*
D D
D D D
D D D
)
%!! Spousal consortium
D
/ D %!% Parental consortium
D
D %!# Filial consortium
6
22
3 /
E
3 /
23 3>
6
*
C
6 6
24
D
D C 0 8*
7 &++++
(, % %
*7- %
% )*%
7-
% 0 (( % % * ; %*$
=
/7,<,5#
C
1B?4 %
/7,<,5#
&
)*% %
/7,<,5#
(+ * $
% &
%
* )
*
)*% % * %
&% *
("
$ * % %
= 3* &% FAO"4272"2018, titled as "
Chameli Devi and others Vs. Sanjeev Kumar and others", decided on 28.01.2026 &%
?
:%
*
* % ?%
*%
) ? %
%
B!!
whether the family pension being received by the widow can be taken into account while computing the loss of dependency !%
Mrs. Helen C.
Rebello & Ors. v. Maharashtra State Road Transport Corpn. & Anr. AIR, 1998 SC 3191
6
3>
6
/ and not other forms of death
"
*
<
6
D
D !# )
D
D
0
There is no co"relation between the family pension, which in any case the family would have got and the amount which is paid on account of accidental death !&
7 $ 6
United India Insurance Co. Ltd. etc. v.
Patrica Jean Mahajan & Ors., 2002 (6) SCC 281
*
!( *
Lal Dei & Ors. v. Himachal Road Transport, (2007) 8 SCC 319 6
* ;
family pension
therefore, the family pension amount paid to the family cannot be deducted while calculating the compensation awarded to the claimants !' * Vimal Kanwar & Ors. v. Kishore Dan & Ors., AIR 2013 SC 3830
E 6 D C . Pension *
3>
6
DC
6 D) /
3
7 $ C . Pension *
< <
0
. 9 D
D
0
0
3>
6
D
*
!4 0
Sebastiani Lakra v. National Insurance Company Ltd., AIR 2018 SC 5034
deductions cannot be allowed
or on account of pensionary benefits
* amounts of pension and gratuity
0
If the deduction towards the family pension is permitted, it would amount to a tort fissure being given the benefit of munificence or gratuity of others !2 3
F 0
Hanumantharaju B (Dead) by LRs v. M. Akram Pasha & Anr. 2025 INSC 682
( /
Hanumantharaju B's case (supra)
G B!5*
/ "
/
/
B
3>
6 !522 .
Vimal Kanwar & Ors. v. Kishore Dan & Ors. (2013) 7 SCC 476
Helen C. Rebello v.
Maharashtra SRTC (1999) 1 SCC 90 G B!5
7 3 07H !555$!05+G!5550 $ !54I *
B
A
0
3>
6
B
A
G 0!!! !%#($ B#(<
0
3>
6
J
0
K
0
*
*
6
E 9
0
C !# %+
.
3 >
6
L
F
)
$
6
6
/
3 >
6 6
6
3 >
6
A
C.
)
Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Shashi Sharma & Ors. (2016) 9 SCC 627 and National Insurance Company Ltd. v. Birender & Ors. (2020) 11 SCC 356.A %+ M
%!
7 !(%&4"
7 #'%#!"
7 #'%#!"
D (< ) * %
)*%
%
/7,<,5#
)
(7 % % )*%
(,9 %%
17- 4
(79 %%
*
(/ % % )*%
% (5+ ?
?
%*
1 4 )*%
"
(6 ) % &% % Jitender Kumar v. Sanjay Prasad passed in Civil Appeal No. 7199 of 2025 (Arising Out of SLP(C)No. 27779 of 2023), decided on 22.05.2025
&% %
) &%
E
?
*
%
) ?&%% :%
% * * %
&)
)
Jitender Kumar's case (supra) % %
B!#*
Birender (Supra)
G D!&*
/
D
14. Such exposition came to be followed by this Court in Seema Rani and Ors. v. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. and Ors., 2025 SCC Online SC 283., wherein it was observed that the application for compensation, even by married sons and daughters, must be considered, irrespective of whether they are fully dependant or not*
$
3 .3
$ *
$
A (- $ %
* *%
:%
$ % ; %
%
)
%
%
*
(0 &
:%
% ; %
%
% *
)
(5< * % ?
% +, % % )*%
%
)
% &%%
%
) :%
% &% 34
+( $ * = 3*% &% * %
)
++ ,( +,(- ) #
%
%
#%
#
7 Sr.
No.
Heads Compensation Awarded ( $
/7,<,5# + C%% 8(79
067/5#1(79 /7,<,4 "
%
?
%(5<
(-/005#16<60/F(5<4 < ) $
7/,065#16<60/#(-/004 < %
%
/,7-<6/5#17/,06F(+F04 / G
B
(7,,,5# C% B?
(7,,,5# - G
&
%
+,,,,,5# %
<,,,,5#?( C
<,,,,5#?(
<,,,,5#?"
!
!-/ *# ;!* #')>
>)? 1+, ;!* % * )*% #'(7> > .? *= *, 1
-!+* #'(> >).? )
)(7 .
++ *= 3*% &% Dara Singh @ Dhara Banjara Vs. Shyam Singh Varma 7 ()
R.Valli and Others VS. Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation
.
4+/$ - !+$ # # > #
809
%
%
E
+"
&
:%
! "#$
% &
%
)*%
%
) )*% *%
%
%
5
++ ,( +,(- )
5 %
* ; %
)*% +<
4
4
.' (' ) % H ; # ; I 5! H * I