SAMEEM BEGUM AND OTHERS v. K. VENKAT SWAMY AND ANOTHER
2026 INSC 864 · SLP (C) No. 18553 of 2023
Coram: N.V. Anjaria; Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh
Yes. The children, aged between 18 and 21 years, were legal representatives and dependants of the deceased entitled to parental consortium, which neither the Tribunal nor the High Court had properly awarded; the compensation was recalculated to include it.
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 166(1)(c) — consortium — spousal consortium — parental consortium — filial consortium — Pranay Sethi —
Section 166(1)(c) — legal representative — entitlement —
Held: The children of the deceased, aged between 18 and 21 years, were admittedly dependants and therefore legal representatives entitled to consortium. Both spousal and parental consortium had to be awarded, which the Tribunal had wrongly withheld from them. (¶5, ¶6)
Pranay Sethi — conventional heads — 10% triennial enhancement —
Held further: Following Pranay Sethi, each claimant was awarded a fixed Rs. 40,000/- under the head of consortium — spousal for the wife, parental for each child — enhanced by 10% to Rs. 48,400/- per claimant, along with a corresponding increase in the conventional heads of funeral expenses and loss of estate. (¶7)
recalculated compensation — additional amount with interest —
Held further: The total compensation was recalculated to Rs. 12,47,272/-, and the additional amount of Rs. 1,46,600/- was directed to be paid with 7.5% interest within six weeks. The judgment of the High Court was accordingly modified and the appeal allowed. (¶8, ¶11)
In the Court's own words
Paragraph 6In the present case, appellant No. 1 is the wife whereas appellant Nos. 2 to 4 are the sons and the daughter of the deceased. All the children are aged between 18 and 21 years. They would be legitimately and legally entitled to amount of compensation under the head of consortium, spousal as well as parental. It was never in dispute that appellant Nos. 2 to 4 were dependants of the deceased. Appellant Nos. 2 to 4, therefore, ought to have been considered as legal representatives and dependants of the deceased to be entitled to parental consortium. 6.1. The Tribunal committed a manifest error in granting only Rs. 5,000/- to the wife and did not award any parental consortium to the children. On the other hand, the High Court while enhancing the total compensation from Rs.8,44,000/- to Rs.11,00,672/- granted collectively Rs.77,000/- under all the conventional heads. Thus, the High Court also missed its legal duty to ensure that due amount under the head of consortium is awarded in accordance with law to the appellants to arrive at just and legal compensation.
Paragraph 7In light of a decision in Pranay Sethi (supra) and Magma General Insurance Company Limited (supra), each of the claimants who are the wife and the children of the deceased, would be entitled to a fixed amount Rs. 40,000/- each under the head of consortium, classified as spousal consortium for appellant No. 1 and parental consortium for appellant Nos. 2, 3 and 4. Furthermore, as observed in Pranay Sethi (supra), this amount has to be enhanced at the rate of 10% at the interval of every three years. Accordingly, after adding 10% each of the appellants would be entitled to Rs. 48,400/- each under the head of consortium. 7.1. As a result of the above discussion, after adding the amount under the head of ‘consortium’ and maintaining the amount under the head ‘loss of dependency’ as awarded by the High Court, finding it appropriate to increase the amount under the heads of ‘Funeral expenses’ and ‘Loss of Estate’ from Rs. 10,000/- each to Rs. 15,000/- each, the total amount of compensation payable would stand recalculated as under, Compensation Amounts to be awarded Heads Loss of dependency Income – 7,000/- p.m. 7,000/- + 25% (1,750) = 8,750/- 8,750 – 1/4 =6,562/- p.m. 6,562 x 12 x 13 = Rs. 10,23,672/- Loss of consortium (i) Spousal Consortium to Appellant No. 1 - wife. Rs. 40,000/- + 10% increase for three years = Rs. 48,400/-
One judgment a day. That's the whole habit.
Read the full text of SAMEEM BEGUM AND OTHERS v. K. VENKAT SWAMY AND ANOTHER — and get the Supreme Court's output as a five-minute daily read, with plain-language headnotes and the questions each judgment settles.
Create my free accountFree forever plan · 30 seconds · data stays in India