ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs. KIRAN DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this case the appellant impugns an award of compensation on the ground that two documents have been produced by the claimants apropos the age of the victim. As per the voter identity card, his age would be 53 years; whereas as per the document issued by the UIDAI, it would be 56 years and the corresponding multipliers would be 9 and 11 respectively. It is the appellant's case that the investigations have been carried out apropos both the cards and they were found to be validly issued. It is the appellant's case that the card issued by UIDAI should be taken into consideration because it specifically mentions his date of birth whereas the electoral card does not do so. The UIDAI card mentions his date of birth as 01.01.1961 which fixes his age as 56 years. Accordingly, this card would be applicable as it is more precise apropos his date of birth. In the circumstances, the multiplier of 9 would be applicable for compensation of loss of dependency. Therefore, the insurance company would recalculate the loss of dependency and pay the recalculate amount to the respondent, in terms of the scheme of disbursement.

(2.) However, at this stage, the Court would note that the impugned order has not awarded any compensation for loss of filial consortium to the claimants. The claimants are the widow and six children of the deceased. The loss of consortium has been awarded only to the widow Smt. Kiran Devi. The children too would be entitled to receipt of compensation for loss of filial consortium as has been elaborately held by the Supreme Court in Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nanu Ram Alias Chuhru Ram and Ors. The Supreme Court has held inter alia:

(3.) Accordingly, each of the children will be entitled to compensation for loss of filial consortium @ Rs.40,000/-. Let the said amount be paid by the appellant to the children.