Spousal, parental, and filial consortium is payable individually to each eligible claimant.

On 14 October 2003, Rajesh Dhirubhai Bayad was standing on a kacha road near Khodiyar Electricals, opposite V.D. High School, Bhuj, when a luxury bus bearing registration No. GJ-20-T-9833, allegedly driven rashly and negligently at excessive speed, hit him.

He sustained injuries and subsequently died; an FIR was registered at Bhuj Police Station.

His legal heirs filed MACP No. 623 of 2003 under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, claiming compensation of Rs.60,00,000.

The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal partly allowed the claim and awarded Rs.12,62,320 with interest at 9% per annum, comprising loss of dependency of Rs.11,92,320, consortium of Rs.40,000 to claimant No.1, loss of estate of Rs.15,000 and funeral expenses of Rs.15,000.

The claimants appealed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, challenging only the quantum under the heads of consortium, loss of estate and funeral expenses; the award for loss of dependency was not disputed.

Whether the Tribunal erred in awarding loss of consortium only to claimant No.1 instead of granting consortium to the eligible claimants individually.

Whether the amounts awarded under the heads of loss of estate and funeral expenses required enhancement in accordance with the applicable legal principles governing conventional heads of compensation.

What enhanced compensation and consequential directions should be granted to the appellants.

The appeal was governed by Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, concerning an appeal against an award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal.

The Court applied Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nanu Ram @ Chuhru Ram, (2018) 18 SCC 130, which recognizes entitlement to spousal, parental and filial consortium for the wife, children and parents respectively.

This principle was reiterated in United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Satinder Kaur @ Satwinder Kaur, (2021) 11 SCC 780.

The Court also applied National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi, (2017) 16 SCC 680, under which amounts awarded under conventional heads are to be enhanced by 10% every three years.

Applying these principles, the Court treated the applicable amount of consortium as Rs.48,400 per eligible claimant and enhanced loss of estate and funeral expenses to Rs.18,150 each.

The Tribunal had accepted the deceased’s monthly income at Rs.6,210, his age at 34 years, and his employment as a Junior Clerk, and had correctly assessed loss of dependency at Rs.11,92,320 by adding 50% towards future prospects and applying the multiplier of 16; the claimants did not challenge this component.

However, the Tribunal granted consortium only to the widow and awarded Rs.15,000 each for loss of estate and funeral expenses.

Applying Magma General Insurance and Satinder Kaur, the High Court held that consortium was payable individually to the eligible claimants, resulting in Rs.48,400 × 3, or Rs.1,45,200, under that head.

Applying the 10% enhancement principle in Pranay Sethi, the Court increased loss of estate and funeral expenses to Rs.18,150 each.

The revised total compensation was therefore calculated at Rs.13,73,820, against the Tribunal’s award of Rs.12,62,320, producing an enhancement of Rs.1,11,500.

The High Court modified the Tribunal’s award by granting an additional compensation of Rs.1,11,500 with interest at 9% per annum from the date of the claim petition until realization.

The Insurance Company was directed to deposit the enhanced amount with accrued interest within eight weeks, after which the Tribunal was directed to disburse it to the claimants by account-payee cheque, NEFT or RTGS, subject to verification, due procedure and deduction of applicable court fees.

The Tribunal’s award was modified accordingly, and the connected civil application, if any, was disposed of.