Deep Shikha & Anr Vs National Insurance Company Ltd. & Ors. (Supreme Court of India)
Supreme Court held that a married daughter may be considered a legal representative, but, she will not be eligible for loss of dependency compensation unless it is proven by the daughter that she was financially dependent on the deceased. Accordingly, compensation was denied due to lack of dependency.
Facts- On 26.01.2008 at around 1:15 pm, the deceased, namely, Smt.Paras Sharma was on her two-wheeler and when she reached a road crossing where a Roadways bus stopped to her left and the negligently took a sudden right turn due to which the deceased came under the rear right-side tyre of the offending vehicle and succumbed to her injuries.
A claim petition was filed by the Appellants, who are the married daughter of the deceased (“Appellant No. 1”) and mother of the deceased (“Appellant No. 2”), respectively, seeking compensation of Rs. 54,30,740/-.
The Tribunal vide order dated 11.05.2011, however, only allowed the claim petition to the extent of Rs. 15,97,000/-.
The Claimants-Appellants and Respondent No.1 – Insurance Company preferred separate appeals before the High Court. The Claimants-Appellants were aggrieved by the amount of compensation awarded, seeking enhancement of the same. On the other hand, Respondent No. 1 was aggrieved by the award to Appellant No.1 i.e. the daughter of the deceased, on the ground that she was entitled to lesser compensation in light of Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. Insofar as Appellant No.2 i.e. the mother of the deceased is concerned, Respondent No. 1 argued that she is not entitled to any compensation whatsoever because she cannot be considered a legal heir of the deceased.
