SUVRA GHOSH,JJ. - (1.) The principal legal issue that has arisen herein is whether, in the light of a recent Supreme Court judgment reported at 2018 SCC OnLine SC 1546 (Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. v Nanu Ram), it is permissible to award amounts to relatives other than the spouse under the head of "loss of consortium", notwithstanding the Constitution Bench judgment reported at (2017) 6 SCC 680 (National Insurance Company Limited v Pranay Sethi).
(2.) In Nanu Ram, the judgment in Pranay Sethi was noticed at paragraph 10. However, an additional amount that was granted on account of loss of estate was not interfered with in Nanu Ram by expressly referring to the authority of the Supreme Court under Article 142 of the Constitution. While dealing with the head of "loss of consortium" and referring to Pranay Sethi in such context, Nanu Ram observed as follows towards the end of paragraph 10 of the report: " 10 ... 8.7 ... "The Motor Vehicles Act is a beneficial legislation aimed at providing relief to the victims or their families, in cases of genuine claims. In case where a parent has lost their minor child, or unmarried son or daughter, the parents are entitled to be awarded loss of consortium under the head of Filial Consortium. "Parental Consortium is awarded to children who lose their parents in motor vehicle accidents under the Act. "A few High Courts have awarded compensation on this count. However, there was no clarity with respect to the principles on which compensation could be awarded on loss of Filial Consortium. "The amount of compensation to be awarded as consortium will be governed by the principles of awarding compensation under 'Loss of Consortium' as laid down in Pranay Sethi (supra). "In the present case, we deem it appropriate to award the father and the sister of the deceased, an amount of Rs.40,000/- each for loss of Filial Consortium."
(3.) What is evident from the above is that the law relating to loss of consortium has been left untouched and Pranay Sethi has been said to rule the field. However, filial consortium in that case was awarded under Article 142 of the Constitution and such part of the order in Nanu Ram cannot be regarded as the law laid down by the Supreme Court under Article 141 of the Constitution. There is good reason for taking this view.;