The New India Assurance Company Limited v Smt. Somwati and Others (2020)

After the Constitution Bench in National Insurance Co. Ltd. v Pranay Sethi (2017) fixed three conventional heads in death cases — loss of estate, loss of consortium and funeral expenses — Tribunals and High Courts kept adding a fourth: "loss of love and affection", often per claimant. They also disagreed on whether consortium was payable only to the widow, or to children and parents too.

Somwati settles both points for claims practice:

1. Consortium is payable not only to the spouse but also to children (parental consortium) and parents (filial consortium), to each claimant entitled.
2. Loss of love and affection is not a separate head. It is comprehended in consortium, and awards under it must be set aside.

The lead appeal: Ram Jiyawan died in a motor vehicle accident on 6 December 2001, leaving his widow Smt. Somwati and seven minor children. A claim petition under s. 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act 1988 claimed Rs. 15,25,000. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, by award of 22 March 2003, allowed Rs. 1,67,000 with 9% interest. On the claimants' appeal the High Court awarded Rs. 12,54,000, including:

• loss of love and affection — Rs. 4,00,000 (Rs. 50,000 to each of the eight claimants); and
• loss of parental consortium — Rs. 2,80,000 (Rs. 40,000 to each of the seven children).

The Insurance Company appealed. On 24 April 2019 the Supreme Court issued notice limited to "the issue whether both consortium and loss of love and affection could have been awarded by the High Court in this case", and stayed payment of the love-and-affection amount.

The connected appeals raised the same two heads on different facts (deaths in 2007, 2008, 2010, 2014 and 2015). In Oriental Insurance v Rinku Devi there was an extra complaint: the High Court, on the insurer's own appeal, had enhanced the love-and-affection award, and had directed the statutory deposit to be paid into the AASRA fund.

As the Court framed it: "In all the appeals, only issue to be considered is 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."

1. Is consortium payable only to the wife, or also to children and parents of the deceased?
2. Can compensation be awarded under a separate head of "loss of love and affection" in addition to consortium?

For the insurers: Pranay Sethi recognised only three conventional heads (Rs. 15,000, Rs. 40,000 and Rs. 15,000); an award for loss of love and affection is "wholly without jurisdiction"; and consortium is payable only to the wife, at Rs. 40,000, not to every claimant.

For the claimants: consortium "cannot be given a narrow interpretation" and has rightly been given to wife, children and parents.

All the appeals were partly allowed. Consortium awarded to each claimant was upheld; the awards for loss of love and affection were set aside.

Just compensation

"The expression ‘compensation’ is a comprehensive term which includes a claim for the damages." The claimant under s. 166 "is entitled for just compensation. The just compensation has to be equitable and fair." The Court reviewed Susamma Thomas, Sarla Verma, Pranay Sethi, Magma General Insurance v Nanu Ram (2018) and the three-Judge Bench decision in United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v Satinder Kaur (2020).

Consortium: spousal, parental and filial

The three-Judge Bench in Satinder Kaur had approved Magma's reading of consortium as a compendious term covering spousal, parental and filial consortium. The Court treated itself as bound: "We feel ourselves bound by the above judgment of Three Judge Bench."

It rejected the argument that Pranay Sethi limited consortium to the widow. The Constitution Bench fixed Rs. 40,000 for loss of consortium but "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."

An earlier three-Judge Bench decision (Sangita Arya), where only Rs. 40,000 consortium was awarded, was distinguished because there had been no claim for consortium by other heirs: "No such ratio can be deciphered from the above judgment that this Court held that consortium is only payable as a spousal consortium and consortium is not payable to children and parents." Likewise M.H. Uma Maheshwari (2020) did not decide the point, because the insurer had not challenged the love-and-affection award there.

So the High Courts' awards of consortium "to each of the claimants" were "in accordance with law".

Loss of love and affection: no separate head

"The Constitution Bench in Pranay Sethi has also not under conventional head included any compensation towards ‘loss of love and affection’". The Court concluded: "It is thus now authoritatively well settled that no compensation can be awarded under the head ‘loss of love and affection’."

It relied on the direction in Satinder Kaur, which it quoted: "Loss of love and affection is comprehended in loss of consortium." and "There is no justification to award compensation towards loss of love and affection as a separate head."

The Rinku Devi appeal

The High Court's love-and-affection award of Rs. 50,000 to each claimant was set aside as unjustified, and the Court also set aside the High Court's direction to deposit the statutory amount with interest in the AASRA fund.

Order

"The award of compensation under the conventional head ‘loss of love and affection’ is set aside. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunals shall recompute the amount payable and take further steps in accordance with law." No costs.

In a death claim under the Motor Vehicles Act 1988, "consortium" includes spousal, parental and filial consortium, and is payable to each eligible claimant — the spouse, the children and the parents — at the amount fixed under Pranay Sethi. Pranay Sethi does not confine consortium to the widow. "Loss of love and affection" is comprehended in consortium and is not a separate conventional head; no compensation can be awarded under it.

• Direct question: What are the conventional heads of compensation in a death claim under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988? Can compensation be awarded for loss of love and affection? Set out the three heads from Pranay Sethi, then Magma and Satinder Kaur on the three kinds of consortium, then Somwati striking down love and affection as a separate head.
• Problem question: a widow and three minor children claim; the Tribunal awards consortium only to the widow plus Rs. 50,000 each for loss of love and affection. Answer: consortium is payable to each claimant (spousal to the widow, parental to each child); the love-and-affection award must go.
• Precedent point: note how a three-Judge Bench decision (Satinder Kaur) bound this Bench, and how the Court read Pranay Sethi, Sangita Arya and Uma Maheshwari for what they actually decided — a good illustration of finding the ratio of a case.
• Link: read with Sarla Verma v Delhi Transport Corporation (2009) and National Insurance Co. Ltd. v Pranay Sethi (2017) as the line of cases on computing just compensation.