Siblings Not Entitled To Compensation For 'Loss Of Love' In Motor Accident Death Claims: Kerala High Court
The Kerala High Court has reaffirmed that siblings of a deceased accident victim are not entitled to compensation under a separate head of “loss of love and affection”.Justice Shoba Annamma Eapen was delivering the judgment in an appeal filed by the mother and siblings of a 21-year-old man who died in a road accident in 2014. While the Court enhanced compensation under the head of loss...
The Kerala High Court has reaffirmed that siblings of a deceased accident victim are not entitled to compensation under a separate head of “loss of love and affection”.
Justice Shoba Annamma Eapen was delivering the judgment in an appeal filed by the mother and siblings of a 21-year-old man who died in a road accident in 2014. While the Court enhanced compensation under the head of loss of dependency, it reduced the amount granted by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (MACT) towards “loss of love and affection,” restricting consortium compensation to the mother alone.
The Tribunal had awarded ₹4,00,000 under the head of “loss of love and affection” to the mother and three siblings collectively. The insurer contended that such an award was impermissible in light of the decision in V.Pathmavathi and Others v Bharathi Axa General Insurance Company Ltd. and Ors. [Manu/SC/0130/2026] and that only the mother could claim consortium.
The Court noted that in National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi [2017(4) KlT 662(SC)], the Supreme Court has identified the permissible conventional heads of compensation in death cases, namely loss of estate, loss of consortium, and funeral expenses
The Court further relied on Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nanu Ram [(2018) 18 SCC 130], in which the Supreme Court expanded the concept of consortium to include spousal consortium, parental consortium, and filial consortium. In Magma, it was held that the “loss of love and affection” is subsumed within a consortium and cannot be awarded separately.
Reliance was also placed on V. Pathmavathi v. Bharathi Axa General Insurance Co. Ltd. [Manu/SC/0130/2026], where the Supreme Court reiterated that courts are bound by Pranay Sethi and cannot create new heads of compensation beyond those recognised by the Constitution Bench.
The Court observed that although Pathmavathi did not directly address compensation to siblings, it reaffirmed that no separate award under loss of love and affection is permissible and Compensation must remain confined to recognised consortium categories.
“ I find that the siblings are not entitled for any compensation under the head loss of love and affection. In the present case, the tribunal has awarded an amount of ₹ 4,00,000/- under the head loss of love and affection .” Court held.
The Court thus held that only the mother was entitled to ₹40,000/- towards loss of consortium and the award of ₹4,00,000 under “loss of love and affection” was reduced by ₹3,60,000.
At the same time, the Court enhanced compensation under “loss of dependency” by recalculating the deceased's notional income and applying future prospects under Pranay Sethi.
The total compensation was revised from ₹12,94,360 to ₹15,60,760, resulting in a net enhancement of ₹2,66,400 payable by the insurer with 9% interest.
Case Title: Mariyakutty and Ors. v United India Insurance Company Ltd.
Case No: MACA 1915/ 2016
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 124
Counsel for Appellants/ Petitioners: AVM. Salahudin
Counsel for Respondent: P K Manojkumar (SC, United India)