Rukaiya And Ors vs Noor Mohd And Ors
- Court
- Punjab and Haryana High Court
FAO No.1629 of 2021 (O&M) -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
FAO No.1629 of 2021(O&M)
RESERVED ON: 16.10.2026
PRONOUNCED ON: 31.10.2026
UPLOADED ON: 31.10.2026
Rukaiya and others …..Appellants
VERSUS
Noor Mohd. and others .....Respondents
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPINDER SINGH NALWA
Present: Mr. Kunal Phogat, Advocate for the appellants.
Mr. Ankur Gupta, Advocate (through VC) for respondent
No.3-Insurance Company.
*
DEEPINDER SINGH NALWA, J.(Oral)
CM No.10247-CII of 2021
Present application has been filed under Section 5 of
Limitation Act, 1963, for condonation of 823 days’ delay in filing the
present appeal.
Notice of motion in the application was issued vide order
dated 21.08.2024. However, no reply to the application has been filed on
behalf of respondent No.3-Insurance Company.
In view of the reasons mentioned in the application which is
duly supported by an affidavit, same is allowed as prayed for. Delay of 823
days in filing the appeal is condoned.
DIWAKER GULATI
2026.10.31 14:05
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
FAO No.1629 of 2021 (O&M) -2-
FAO No.1629 of 2021
1 . The present appeal has been filed by the appellants/claimants
No.1 to 5 against the award dated 26.09.2018 passed by the Motor
Accident Claims Tribunal, Gurugram (for short, ‘the Tribunal’) seeking
enhancement of compensation.
2. The brief facts of the case are that on 29.03.2017, a telephonic
message was received at police station Nuh, District Mewat, intimating
that one Salamuddin @ Salamu (since deceased) was admitted in Nalhar
Hospital, Nuh, due to roadside accidental injuries. On the basis of
abovesaid message, Head Constable Jamshed and C. Noman had visited
Nalhar Hospital, Nuh and collected MLR No.380 dated 29.03.2017
(Ex.P4) of Salamuddin @ Salamu (since deceased), who at that time was
not found admitted in the hospital. On 30.08.2017, an information was
received that Salamuddin @ Salamu (since deceased) had expired and on
the basis of said information, police party rushed to CHC Nuh where the
dead body of Salamuddin @ Salamu was kept. A statement was recorded
there by the police given by Babua son of Samsu, resident of village
Kairaka, District Nuh. It transpires that eye-witness Babua in his
statement (Ex.P2) given to the police disclosed that on 29.03.2017 he was
going from his village Kairaka to village Devla Nangli for some personal
work. At that time, a young boy was going ahead on his motorcycle from
village Bibipur to Devla. At about 2.30 PM, when they reached near
Bajhera Bridge, one Hyva Dumper bearing registration No.HR 74-8413
(hereinafter to be referred as ‘the offending vehicle’) had hit the
motorcycle bearing registration No.HR 52A-9538 of that young boy. After
DIWAKER GULATI
2026.10.31 14:05
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
FAO No.1629 of 2021 (O&M) -3-
hitting the motorcycle, the driver of offending vehicle fled the spot leaving
the dumper behind. On the basis of abovesaid statement given by eye-
witness Babua, an FIR No.180 dated 30.03.2017 (Ex.P3) was registered
under Sections 279 and 304-A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short,
‘IPC’), at Police Station Nuh. During the course of investigation, the
driver of the offending vehicle was identified and was arrested on
11.04.2017. The police had filed the challan against the driver for rash and
negligent driving causing death of Salamuddin @ Salamu. Claiming that
the family members of the deceased were dependent upon him, widow,
parents and minor children of the Salamuddin @ Salamu (since deceased)
filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988
before the Tribunal seeking compensation of Rs.40 lakhs along with
interest @ 18% per annum from the date of accident till realization on
account of death of Salamuddin @ Salamu (since deceased) in a motor
vehicular accident.
3. Despite being served, the driver and owner of the offending
vehicle did not appear and were proceeded ex parte vide order dated
28.03.2018 passed by the Tribunal. The Insurance Company filed its
written statement admitting the factum of issuance of insurance policy
(Ex.P9) in respect of the offending vehicle in favour of its registered
owner. It was the case of the Insurance Company that there was violation
of terms and conditions of the insurance policy by the owner of the
offending vehicle, as the driver did not have a valid and effective driving
licence. It was also the case of the Insurance Company that accident might
have occurred on account of negligence on the part of Salamuddin @
DIWAKER GULATI
2026.10.31 14:05
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
FAO No.1629 of 2021 (O&M) -4-
Salamu (since deceased). The Tribunal decided the claim petition in favour
of the claimants vide award dated 26.09.2018.
4. A perusal of the award dated 26.09.2018 passed by the
Tribunal would show that the claimants were held entitled for grant of
compensation of Rs.23,59,038/- along with interest @ 8% per annum from
the date of filing of the claim petition till realization. The driver, owner and
Insurance Company of the offending vehicle were held jointly and
severally liable to pay the said compensation to the claimants. It was held
that Insurance Company at the first instance would pay abovesaid
compensation but would have recovery rights against the insured i.e. the
owner of the offending vehicle. It was further held that an amount of
Rs.9,59,038/- along with interest out of entire compensation, was to be
paid to the widow of Salamuddin @ Salamu (since deceased) by way of
deposit of 50% thereof in her bank account and remaining 50% in the
shape of FDR in some nationalised bank for five years. An amount of
Rs.8,00,000/- out of compensation was to be paid to minor children of
Salamuddin @ Salamu (since deceased) in equal shares of Rs.2,00,000/-
each by way of deposit in FDRs in some nationalised bank till they attain
the age of majority, in accordance with law. Parents of Salamuddin @
Salamu (since deceased) were to be paid an amount of Rs.6,00,000/- in
equal shares i.e. Rs.3,00,000/- each from the compensation by way of
deposit in their bank accounts.
5. Aggrieved against the abovesaid award dated 26.09.2018
passed by the Tribunal, appellants/claimants No.1 to 5 i.e. widow and
DIWAKER GULATI
2026.10.31 14:05
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
FAO No.1629 of 2021 (O&M) -5-
children except parents of Salamuddin @ Salamu (since deceased) have
filed the present appeal.
6. The only contention raised by learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the appellants/claimants No.1 to 5 is that only Rs.40,000/- has
been awarded under the head of loss of consortium. He submits that all the
claimants are entitled for compensation under the head of loss of
consortium, as such, the appellants/claimants No.1 to 5 are entitled for
enhanced compensation.
7. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No.3-
Insurance Company could not dispute the fact that as per the settled law all
the claimants are entitled for grant of compensation under the head of loss
of consortium.
8. I have heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
parties and perused the paper-book with their able assistance.
9. In regard to the contention raised by the learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the appellants/claimants No.1 to 5 regarding grant
of compensation under the head of loss of consortium to all the claimants
is concerned, it is well settled law that all the family members of the
deceased are entitled to compensation under the head of loss of
consortium. Reliance has been placed upon the judgment of the Hon’ble
Supreme Court titled as Magma General Insurance Company Ltd. Vs.
Nanu Ram alias Chuhru Ram and others, 2018 (4) RCR (Civil) 333,
wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that family members of the
deceased are entitled to compensation under the head of loss of
DIWAKER GULATI
2026.10.31 14:05
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
FAO No.1629 of 2021 (O&M) -6-
consortium. The relevant extract from the said judgment is reproduced
hereinbelow:-
“8.7 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. Rajesh and
Ors. v. Rajbir Singh and Ors. (2013) 9 SCC 54.
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."
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. 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
DIWAKER GULATI
2026.10.31 14:05
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
FAO No.1629 of 2021 (O&M) -7-
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.”
10. Taking into consideration the facts of the present case and the
judgment referred above, appellants/claimants No.1 to 5 as well as
proforma respondents No.4 and 5 i.e. parents of Salamuddin @ Salamu
(since deceased) are held entitled to compensation of amount of
Rs.40,000/- each under the head of loss of consortium.
11. Accordingly, the appellants/claimants No.1 to 5 and proforma
respondents No.4 and 5 are held entitled to enhanced compensation re-
assessed as hereunder:-
Assessment
Date of Accident 29.03.2017
Age of deceased 26 years
Occupation labour work
Claimants Widow, mother, father and minor children of the
deceased
1. Annual Income Rs.10,000 x12 =
1,20,000/-
2. Addition for future prospects @ 40% Rs.1,68,000/-
DIWAKER GULATI
2026.10.31 14:05
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
FAO No.1629 of 2021 (O&M) -8-
Rs.1,20,000 + Rs.48,000/-
3. Deduction for personal and living
expenses (1/5)
Rs.1,68,000/- - Rs.33,600/-
Rs.1,34,400/-
4. Multiplier 17
5. Total loss of dependency Rs. 22,84,800/-
Rs.1,34,400 x 17
6. Loss of Estate Rs.15,000/-
7. Funeral Expenses Rs. 15,000/-
8. Loss of consortium Rs. 2,80,000/-
Rs.40,000/- x 7
9. Medical expenses (bill Ex.P13) (as Rs.4238/-
awarded by the Tribunal)
10. Amount awarded by Tribunal Rs. 23,59,038/-
11. Enhanced amount Rs.2,40,000/-
12. Final enhanced compensation Rs. 25,99,038/-
12. In view of the above, the award dated 26.09.2018 passed by
the Tribunal is modified to an extent that appellants/claimants No.1 to 5
and proforma respondents No.4 and 5 i.e. parents of Salamuddin @
Salamu (since deceased) are held entitled to final enhanced compensation
of Rs.25,99,038/- along with interest @ 8 % per annum (as awarded by the
Tribunal) from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual
realization. Respondents No.1 to 3 being driver, owner and Insurance
Company are held jointly and severally liable to pay the above referred
final enhanced compensation.
13. The respondent No.3-Insurance Company is directed to
deposit the above referred final enhanced compensation of an amount of
Rs.25,99,038 /- along with interest with the Tribunal within a period of
two months from the date of passing of this judgment. However, liberty is
granted to respondent No.3- Insurance Company to recover the same from
DIWAKER GULATI
2026.10.31 14:05
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
FAO No.1629 of 2021 (O&M) -9-
respondent No.2 i.e. owner of the offending vehicle as per the award dated
26.09.2018 passed by the Tribunal.
14. The Tribunal is further directed to disburse the enhanced
compensation along with interest, in the accounts of appellants/claimants
No.1 to 5 and proforma respondents No.4 and 5 as apportioned by the
Tribunal. The appellants/claimants No.1 to 5 and proforma respondents
No.4 and 5 are directed to furnish their bank account details to the
Tribunal. The share of appellants No.2 to 5/claimants No.2 to 5 being
minors, shall be deposited in a Fixed Deposit Receipt in a nationalized
bank till they attain the age of majority.
15. It is, however, made clear that in case the Hon’ble Supreme
Court answers the reference regarding quantum of compensation under
conventional heads made in Hasina Yasmin & Ors Vs. National
Insurance Co. Ltd., 2025 SCC Online SC 2919 , in favour of
appellants/claimants, appellants/claimants No.1 to 5 and proforma
respondents No.4 and 5 shall be free to seek said amount by moving
appropriate application in this regard.
16. In view of the above, the present appeal is allowed in the
aforesaid terms.
17. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand(s) disposed of.
OCTOBER 31, 2026 (DEEPINDER SINGH NALWA)
‘D. Gulati’ JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned : yes/no
Whether reportable : yes/no
DIWAKER GULATI
2026.10.31 14:05
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document