NCLAT: In Absence of Contractual Clause Interest for Delayed Payments Can’t Form Part of OD  ||  NCLAT: Can Correct Inadvertent Typographical Errors in Orders Passed by NCLT under NCLT Rules  ||  NCLAT: To Satisfy Requirement of S.8 Service of Demand Notice on Registered E-Mail of CD Sufficient  ||  Delhi HC Closes Suit by Hamdard Against Baba Ramdev’s ‘Sharbat Jihad’ Remark  ||  Delhi HC: Can Consider Documents Filed with Plaint to Determine ‘Cause of Action’  ||  Sikkim HC: Section 29A as Amended in 2019 is Applicable on All Arb. Proceedings Pending at the Time  ||  AP HC: Preliminary Enquiry Report Loses Its Significance, Once Regular Enquiry is Initiated  ||  SC: Can’t Take Cognizance of Offence Under S.186 IPC on Police Report/Chargesheet  ||  SC: Can Admit Unregistered Agree. to Sell as Evidence to Prove Contract in Specific Performance Suit  ||  SC Directs Reservation of Post of Treasure for Women Lawyers in Gujarat High Court    

United India Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Farida Sarosh Poonawala and Ors. - (High Court of Delhi) (24 Jan 2022)

Every legal representative who suffers on account of death of a person due to a motor vehicle accident should have a remedy for realisation of compensation

MANU/DE/0244/2022

Motor Vehicles

Appellant impugns award whereby the detailed accident report has been disposed of and compensation awarded. Learned counsel for the Appellant contends that, the Tribunal has erred in awarding compensation to Respondent no. 2 and 3 who were children of the wife of the deceased from her first marriage. He submits that, they cannot be treated as dependant family members of the deceased.

The Supreme Court in Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation Vs. Ramanbhai Prabhatbhai & Another, has held that having regard to the condition of the Indian society, every legal representative who suffers on account of the death of a person due to a motor vehicle accident should have a remedy for realisation of compensation.

Further, Supreme Court has held that, in Indian family brothers, sisters and brothers' children and sometimes foster children live together and they are dependent upon the bread-winner of the family and if the bread-winner is killed on account of a motor vehicle accident, there is no justification to deny them compensation.

A similar view has been taken by the Supreme Court in N. Jayasree & Ors. Vs. Cholamandalam MS General Insurance Company Ltd., wherein the Supreme Court has held that the term 'legal representative' should be given a wider interpretation for the purpose of Chapter XII of MV Act and it should not be confined only to mean the spouse, parents and children of the deceased. The Supreme Court held that the Motor Vehicle Act is a benevolent legislation enacted for the object of providing monetary relief to the victims or their families. Therefore, the Motor Vehicle Act calls for a liberal and wider interpretation to serve the real purpose underlying the enactment and fulfil its legislative intent.

There is no infirmity in the impugned award and the computation of compensation by the tribunal. Appeal dismissed.

Tags : COMPENSATION   AWARD   LEGALITY  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2025 - All Rights Reserved