JUDGMENT Ajay Mohan Goel, J. - CMP No. 5991 of 2021 No order is required to be passed on this application, as with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the main appeal itself has been taken up for final consideration. FAO No. 115 of 2019 2. Brief facts necessary for the adjudication of the present appeal are as under: A petition was filed by respondents No. 1 to 3 herein (hereinafter referred to as 'the petitioners') under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 for grant of compensation to the tune of Rs.7,00,000/- on account of death of Shri Ramesh Chand Mehra, son of Shri Nathu Ram before the Court of learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-IV, Kangra at Dharamshala, District Kangra, H.P. The case of the petitioners was that they were the legal heirs of deceased Ramesh Chand, who died in a motor vehicle accident on 25.11.2009. As per the petitioners, age of the deceased at the time of accident was 55 years and he used to work as a Munshi (Clerk) with M/s Mahinder Pal & Hari Ram Potato Merchant and was also an agriculturist. His income as Munshi (Clerk) was Rs.5,000/- per month and besides this, he also used to earn Rs.5,000/- per month from agricultural activities. As per the petitioners, the deceased had died in the course of his employment and they were entitled to compensation to the tune of Rs.7,00,000/-. 3. The petition was resisted by the respondents before the learned Tribunal by way of separate replies. The stand of the owner of the vehicle was that the accident in issue did not take place on account of rash and negligent driving of the driver concerned and the deceased in fact was hit near a residence where the vehicle was parked. 4. The claim was resisted by the Insurance Company, inter alia, on the ground that the driver concerned was not holding any valid and effective Driving Licence and at the time of accident and the vehicle was being plied in violation of the terms and conditions of the Insurance Policy. 5. On the basis of pleadings of the parties, learned Tribunal framed the following issues: "(1) Whether Ramesh Chand died in an accident caused due to rash and negligent driving of vehicle No.HP-68-2482 by respondent No. 2 on 25.11.2009 at 8:30 p.m. at Pathiar Chowk? 5. On the basis of pleadings of the parties, learned Tribunal framed the following issues: "(1) Whether Ramesh Chand died in an accident caused due to rash and negligent driving of vehicle No.HP-68-2482 by respondent No. 2 on 25.11.2009 at 8:30 p.m. at Pathiar Chowk? OPP (2) If issue number 1 is proved in affirmative, to what amount of compensation, the petitioners are entitled and from whom? OPP (3) Whether the driver of the vehicle was not holding a valid and effective driving licence at the time of accident? OPR (4) Whether the deceased was travelling in the vehicle as gratuitous passenger? OPR (5) Whether the respondent No. 2 was driving the vehicle No. HP-68-2482 in contravention of terms and conditions of the insurance policy? OPR (6) Relief." 6. On the basis of evidence adduced by the respective parties in support of their respective pleadings and contentions, the following findings were returned by learned Tribunal on the issues so framed: "Issue No. 1: Yes. Issue No. 2: Yes. The petitioners are entitled to get compensation to the tune of Rs.10,26,000/- (Rupees ten lacs and twenty six thousands only) with interest from all the respondents. Issue No. 3: No. Issue No. 4: No. Issue No. 5: No. Relief: The claim petition is allowed as per operative portion of the award." 7. The claim petition was allowed by the learned Tribunal in the following terms: "34. In view of my findings on the aforesaid issues, the petition is allowed with costs and all the petitioners are held entitled for compensation to the tune of Rs.10,26,000/- (Rupees ten lacs and twenty six thousands only) and all the respondents are jointly and severally held liable to make the payment of the aforesaid compensation amount with 9% simple interest from the date of petition i.e. 15.07.2011 till the compensation amount is deposited. The respondents shall deposit the amount of compensation in the Tribunal within 45 days from the date of order. The amount of compensation so awarded is apportioned between the petitioners/claimants as under:- Petitioner No. 1 : Rs.5,00,000/- Petitioner No. 2 : Rs.2,63,000/- Petitioner No. 3 : Rs.2,63,000/- Total : Rs.10,26,000/- This amount of compensation is inclusive of the amount, if any awarded under Section 140 of M.V. Act. Memo of costs be prepared accordingly. The file after its due completion be consigned to the record room. Memo of costs be prepared accordingly. The file after its due completion be consigned to the record room. Announced and signed in the open Court today i.e. 3rd October, 2017." 8. Feeling aggrieved, the award has been challenged by the Insurance Company by way of this appeal. 9. Mr. Praneet Gupta, learned counsel appearing for the appellant while drawing the attention of this Court to paragraph-30 of the award passed by the learned Tribunal has submitted that the impugned award is liable to be set aside in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi and others, (2017) 16 SCC 680 , as the loss of consortium/love and affection, which has been awarded by the learned Tribunal in favour of all the petitioners to the tune of Rs.2,00,000/- each is not sustainable in the eyes of law, as consortium can be granted only to the tune of Rs.40,000/- and that too only to the spouse. Mr. Gupta has further submitted that the last rites and funeral charges which have been awarded by the learned Tribunal to the extent of Rs.30,000/- are also liable to be modified, as only an amount of Rs.15,000/- can be awarded under this Head. On these bases, Mr. Gupta has prayed that the appeal be allowed and the impugned award be ordered to be modified accordingly. 10. Learned counsel for respondents No. 1 to 3/petitioners has argued that even if the contention of learned counsel for the appellant that the amount of consortium awarded by the learned Tribunal has to be reduced, is to be accepted, even then, in view of subsequent judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in New India Assurance Company Limited Vs. Somwati and others, (2020) 9 SCC 644 , it is not as if only the spouse is entitled for consortium and the other petitioners being the children of the deceased are also entitled for the same. 11. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and also gone through the impugned award passed by learned learned Court below as well as record of the case. 12. 11. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and also gone through the impugned award passed by learned learned Court below as well as record of the case. 12. As the controversy involved in this appeal has already been narrowed down, in view of the respective submissions made by learned counsel for the appellant with regard to the grievance of the appellant qua the award in issue as also learned counsel for respondents No. 1 to 3/claimants, therefore, this Court is adjudicating as to whether there is merit in the contentions raised by learned counsel for the appellant or not. As mentioned hereinabove, as per the appellant, the loss of consortium assessed at the rate of Rs.2,00,000/- each in favour of all the petitioners is not sustainable in the eyes of law and funeral expenses are also on higher side, in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Pranay Sethi's case (supra). A perusal of the said judgment demonstrates that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in para-52 thereof has been pleased to hold that reasonable figures on conventional heads, namely, loss of estate, loss of consortium and funeral expenses should be Rs.15,000/-, Rs.40,000/- and Rs.15,000/- respectively. In this view of the matter, in the considered view of this Court, there is merit in the contention of learned counsel for the appellant that the amount of consortium awarded by the learned Tribunal is on the higher side and it is not in consonance with the judgment (supra). However, there is merit in the contention of learned counsel for respondents No. 1 to 3 also that it is not the spouse only, who is entitled for loss of consortium, but children are also entitled for the same in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Somawati's case (supra), in which, Hon'ble Supreme Court in paras-30 and 39 thereof has been pleased to observe that from the earlier judgments on the issue by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, it cannot be deciphered that consortium is payable as spousal consortium and consortium is not payable to children and parents. This means that children of the deceased are also entitled for the grant of consortium. This means that children of the deceased are also entitled for the grant of consortium. Accordingly, though this Court upholds the grant of consortium by the learned Tribunal in favour of all the petitioners, but the amount awarded thereof is ordered to be reduced from Rs.2,00,000/- each to Rs.40,000/- each and last rites and funeral charges are also ordered to be reduced from Rs.30,000/- to Rs.15,000/-. 13. As a result of modification of the award passed by the learned Tribunal by this Court, the claimants shall be entitled to compensation in the following terms: Sr. No. Heads Calculation (i) Income of deceased Rs.4,000/- per month (ii) 1/4th of the income deducted as personal expenses of the deceased= Rs.4,000-1,000=Rs.3,000/- per month (iii) Compensation after multiplier of 11 is applied (Rs.3,000 x 12 x11)=Rs.3,96,000/-. (iv) Loss of consortium/love and affection. Rs.40,000/- each to petitioners No. 1 to 3, i.e., total Rs.1,20,000/-. (v) Last rites and Funeral Charges Rs.15,000/- Total compensation awarded= Rs.5,31,000/- Remaining part of the award is maintained by this Court and is not disturbed. Appeal stands disposed of accordingly. Miscellaneous applications, if any, also stand disposed of. 14. At this stage, a request has been made by learned counsel for respondents No. 1 to 3 that the award amount, as shall be assessed post the decision of present appeal, be released in favour of respondents No. 1 to 3. He further submits that details of bank account are already on record, as are contained in CMP No. 5991 of 2021. A request has also been made by learned counsel for the appellant that the amount which now becomes refundable to the appellants, be ordered to be released in favour of the appellant alongwith proportionate interest. 15. Registry is directed to release the claim amount, as now becomes payable to the claimants, in terms of the judgment passed by this Court today with up-to-date interest in their respective bank accounts and the balance amount is ordered to be refunded in the account of the appellant, bank details whereof shall be supplied by learned counsel for the appellant within one week from today.