Entitlement of Each Dependent to Independent Compensation for Loss of Consortium in Motor Accident Claims.

On January 29, 2018, the deceased was driving his motorcycle (Reg. No. GJ-09-AQ-3254) when a dumper (Reg. No. GJ-02-XX-0635) driving in a rash and negligent manner collided with him, causing his death.

The Appellants (widow and five children) filed a claim petition under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Main), Mahesana, awarded a total compensation of ₹12,97,520/- on November 4, 2023, but granted loss of consortium to only one of the six claimants.

The claimants appealed for an enhancement based on the entitlement of each dependent to consortium.

Whether the Tribunal erred in awarding loss of consortium to only one claimant instead of all six dependents.

The Court applied the principles established by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in *Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nanu Ram Alias Churu Ram & Ors.* (2018) and *New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Smt. Somwati & Ors.* (2020), which mandate that "consortium" includes spousal, parental, and filial consortium, and should be awarded to each legal representative.

It further referred to *Janabai Wd/o Dinkarrao Ghorpade & Ors. v. M/s ICICI Lombard Insurance Co. Ltd.* (2022) regarding the specific entitlement of children to parental consortium and the widow to spousal consortium.

The Court also referenced *National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi* (2017) regarding the standardization of compensation heads.

The Court observed that while there were six claimants (the widow and five children), the Tribunal had awarded a lump sum of only ₹44,000/- for consortium, effectively compensating only one person.

Applying the *Magma General Insurance* precedent, the Court reasoned that the widow (Appellant No. 1) is entitled to "spousal consortium" and the five children (Appellant Nos. 2 to 6) are each entitled to "parental consortium" for the loss of care and protection of their father.

Consequently, the Court reassessed the consortium at ₹48,400/- per person (inclusive of standard increments), totaling ₹2,90,400/- for all six appellants.

The total compensation was enhanced from ₹12,97,520/- to ₹15,43,920/-, resulting in an additional amount of ₹2,46,400/- (Note: though para 8 mentions ₹8,40,700/-, the calculation table in para 7 and the logic in para 6 confirm the consortium-specific enhancement is ₹2,46,400/-).

Respondent No. 3 (Insurance Company) was directed to deposit the additional amount with interest within four weeks.

The Tribunal was directed to deduct deficit court fees on the enhanced amount prior to disbursement.