In a Motor Accident Compensation Claims, compensation for 'loss of consortium' can be awarded to children and parents also

 In The New India Assurance Company vs. Somwati, appeals were 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.”

The only issue to be considered was 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 was as to whether it is only the wife who is entitled for consortium or the consortium can be awarded to children and parents also.

The appellants contended 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/-. They submitted that the amount granted under the head ‘loss of love and affection’ was wholly without jurisdiction and further amount granted under the head ‘consortium’ could not be more than 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.

The Supreme Court observed that the expression ‘compensation’ is a comprehensive term which includes a claim for the damages. Compensation is by way of atonement for the injury caused.

Referring to judgments in General Manager Kerala State Road Transport Corporation, Trivandrum Versus Susamma Thomas(Mrs) and others, (1994) 2 SCC 176, Sarla Verma (Smt) and Others Versus Delhi Transport Corporation and Another, (2009) 6 SCC 121, the Supreme Court observed that in the said judgments it has been held that 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. 

Further in Magma General Insurance Company Limited versus Nanu Ram alias Chuhru Ram and others, (2018) 18 SCC 130, the Supreme Court had elaborated on the concept of ‘loss of consortium’ and had held that “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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Finally, the Supreme Court held that 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 and had observed that several Tribunals and High Courts have been awarding compensation for both loss of consortium and loss of love and affection. 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. In the said judgment ‘consortium’ to all the three claimants was thus awarded. 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

Disagreeing with the appellants, the Supreme Court held that 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. 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 and we are bound by the above judgment of Three Judge Bench.

Thus the Supreme Court partly allowed the appeals by setting aside award of compensation under the conventional head ‘loss of love and affection’ as the same is not approved by the 3 judge bench.