Supreme Court: Whether Motor accident claim tribunal can deduct compensation granted to dependents of workman under workman Compensation Act?

 The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, as also, the High Court, ordered a deduction therefrom of a sum of ` 3,26,140 (paid to the claimants under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923). The said deduction gives full effect to Section 167 of the Motor Vehicles Act. 1988, inasmuch as it awards compensation to the respondents-claimants under the enactment based on the option first exercised, and also ensures that the respondents-claimants are not allowed dual benefit under the two enactments.

 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Civil Appeal No. 937 of 2013.

Decided On: 05.02.2013

Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Dyamavva and Ors.

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

B.S. Chauhan and J.S. Khehar, JJ.

Citation: AIR 2013 SC 1853, MANU/SC/0108/2013.

Read full judgement here: Click here.

Print Page

Supreme Court: Unemployed Husband Can Be Presumed To Be Partially Dependent On Deceased Wife's Income for grant of compensation under motor vehicles Act

 The deduction applicable for personal expenses was fixed

at 1/3rd, considering the dependent family as one comprised of

the deceased and only two children. However, we are of the

opinion that since there was no employment specified of the

husband, it cannot be assumed that he would not have been at

least partially dependent on the income of the deceased. Hence

the family has to be comprised of 4 in which circumstances the

deduction for personal expenses shall be at 1/4th. {Para 7}

Reportable

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO. ______ OF 2025

(@ Special Leave Petition (C) No.27391 of 2018)

SRI MALAKAPPA & ORS. Vs THE IFFCO TOKIO GENERAL

INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED & ANR.

Author: K. VINOD CHANDRAN, J.

Citation: 2025 INSC 590.

Print Page

Supreme Court: Where both the parents were dependent on the deceased, a deduction to the extent of 1/3rd will also be appropriate in motor accident claim petition

 Normally, a deduction to the extent of 50% can be made. However, in Magma General Insurance Company Limited V/s. Nanu Ram alias Chuhru Ram & Ors. MANU/SC/1012/2018 : (2018) 18 SCC 130, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that where both the parents were dependent on the deceased, a deduction to the extent of 1/3rd will also be appropriate. This means that the compensation towards dependency would come to ` 9,07,188/-. {Para 14}

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA

First Appeal No. 120 of 2012

Decided On: 10.01.2022

Damodar Volvoikar and Ors. Vs. West Coast Marketing and Ors.

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

M.S. Sonak, J.

Citation: MANU/MH/0082/2022, 2023 ACJ 82.

Read full Judgment here: Click here.

Print Page

Supreme Court: What are the basis for grant of Future Prospects in Motor accident claim petition?

 8.1. With respect to the issue of Future Prospects, a Constitution Bench of this Court in Pranay Sethi (supra) has held that in case the deceased was self-employed or on a fixed salary, and was below 40 years of age, an addition of 40% of the established income should be granted towards Future Prospects.

Future Prospects are to be awarded on the basis of:

i. the nature of the deceased's employment; and

ii. the age of the deceased.

In the present case, it is claimed by the family of the deceased that he was engaged in making namkeen, and was earning a monthly income of about Rs. 15,000 per month. However, no evidence was brought on record to establish the same. The MACT as well as the High Court assessed the income of the deceased on the basis of the minimum wage of an unskilled worker. The nature of his employment being taken as a self-employed person.

The deceased was 24 years old at the time of the accident. Hence, future Prospects ought to have been awarded at 40% of the actual income of the deceased, instead of 50% as awarded by the High Court.

Hence, the judgment of the High Court on this issue is modified to that extent.

 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Civil Appeal No. 9581 of 2018.

Decided On: 18.09.2018

Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Nanu Ram and Ors.

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

Rohinton Fali Nariman and Indu Malhotra, JJ.

Author: Indu Malhotra, J.

Citation:  MANU/SC/1012/2018,(2018) 18 Supreme Court Cases 130.

Read full Judgment here: Click here.

Print Page

Supreme Court: Father and Unmarried sister of deceased are entitled to get compensation under Motor Vehicles Act

 8.4. The Insurance Company has submitted that the father and the sister of the deceased could not be treated as dependents, and it is only a mother who can be dependent of her son. This contention deserves to be repelled. The deceased was a bachelor, whose mother had pre-deceased him. The deceased's father was about 65 years old, and an unmarried sister. The deceased was contributing a part of his meagre income to the family for their sustenance and survival. Hence, they would be entitled to compensation as his dependents.

 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Civil Appeal No. 9581 of 2018.

Decided On: 18.09.2018

Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Nanu Ram and Ors.

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

Rohinton Fali Nariman and Indu Malhotra, JJ.

Author: Indu Malhotra, J.

Citation:  MANU/SC/1012/2018,(2018) 18 Supreme Court Cases 130.

Read full Judgment here: Click here.

Print Page

Leading Supreme Court Judgment on grant of compensation under the head "Loss of Consortium"

8.7 A Constitution Bench of this Court in Pranay Sethi (supra) dealt with the various heads under which compensation is to be awarded in a death case. One of these heads is Loss of Consortium.

In legal parlance, "consortium" is a compendious term which encompasses 'spousal consortium', 'parental consortium', and 'filial consortium'.

The right to consortium would include the company, care, help, comfort, guidance, solace and affection of the deceased, which is a loss to his family. With respect to a spouse, it would include sexual relations with the deceased spouse.1

Spousal consortium is generally defined as rights pertaining to the relationship of a husband-wife which allows compensation to the surviving spouse for loss of "company, society, co-operation, affection, and aid of the other in every conjugal relation."2

Parental consortium is granted to the child upon the premature death of a parent, for loss of "parental aid, protection, affection, society, discipline, guidance and training."

Filial consortium is the right of the parents to compensation in the case of an accidental death of a child. An accident leading to the death of a child causes great shock and agony to the parents and family of the deceased. The greatest agony for a parent is to lose their child during their lifetime. Children are valued for their love, affection, companionship and their role in the family unit.

Consortium is a special prism reflecting changing norms about the status and worth of actual relationships. Modern jurisdictions world-over have recognized that the value of a child's consortium far exceeds the economic value of the compensation awarded in the case of the death of a child. Most jurisdictions therefore permit parents to be awarded compensation under loss of consortium on the death of a child. The amount awarded to the parents is a compensation for loss of the love, affection, care and companionship of the deceased child.

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.

 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Civil Appeal No. 9581 of 2018.

Decided On: 18.09.2018

Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Nanu Ram and Ors.

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

Rohinton Fali Nariman and Indu Malhotra, JJ.

Author: Indu Malhotra, J.

Citation:  MANU/SC/1012/2018,(2018) 18 Supreme Court Cases 130.

Print Page

Whether widow is entitled to get compensation under workman compensation Act if she remarries?

 Section 2(d) of the Employees' (Workmen's) Compensation Act, 1923 (for short referred to as the Act)defines "dependents". The provision reads as under: {Para 11}

2(d). 'Dependant' means any of the following relatives of a deceased employees namely; (i) a widow, a minor legitimate or adopted son, an unmarried legitimate or adopted daughter, or a widowed mother; and

12. A plain reading of the above definition makes it clear that as on the date of death; wife of the deceased who becomes a widow is treated as a dependant and is made eligible to receive compensation. The Act does not make a distinction between a person who remains widow or who re-marries again.

14. Similar question has fallen for consideration before the High Court of Rajasthan in case of R.B. Moondra and Company Vs. Bhanwari and Others Contention that widow is debarred from claiming the compensation on account of re-marriage is rejected. Para 19 reads as under:

The last contention that the widow became debarred from claiming compensation on account of her remarriage has also no force because in the Act there is no such provision that after remarriage widow of the deceased would not be regarded as a dependent. Under Section 21 of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956, a widow remains a dependant, within the meaning of that section so long as she is not remarried. But the definition of the 'dependant' under the Act is not so restricted and the fact that she has remarried will not disentitle her to claim compensation under the Act.

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD

Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 3122 of 2002

Decided On: 24.04.2013

Mandadi Adilakshmi Vs. Vallabhaneni Siva Prasad and Ors.

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

P. Naveen Rao, J.

Citation: 2014 ACJ 950 (AP), MANU/AP/0562/2013.

Print Page

Hindu Adoption and maintenance Act 1956 (maintenance provisions only)

 Chapter III

MAINTENANCE

18. Maintenance of wife.—(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, a Hindu wife, whether married before or after the commencement of this Act, shall be entitled to be maintained by her husband during her lifetime.

(2) A Hindu wife shall be entitled to live separately from her husband without forfeiting her claim to maintenance,—

(a) if he is guilty of desertion, that is to say, of abandoning her without reasonable cause and without her consent or against her wish, or of wilfully neglecting her;

(b) if he has treated her with such cruelty as to cause a reasonable apprehension in her mind that it will be harmful or injurious to live with her husband;

(c) 13[* * *]

(d) if he has any other wife living;

(e) if he keeps a concubine in the same house in which his wife is living or habitually resides with a concubine elsewhere;

(f) if he has ceased to be a Hindu by conversion to another religion;

(g) if there is any other cause justifying her living separately.

(3) A Hindu wife shall not be entitled to separate residence and maintenance from her husband if she is unchaste or ceases to be a Hindu by conversion to another religion.

Print Page

Whether Divorced Daughter is 'Dependent' U/S 21 Hindu Adoptions & Maintenance Act and Entitled To Maintenance From Late Father's Estate?

It is the admitted case of the parties that the appellant is the daughter of the respondent No. 2 and sister of the respondent No. 1. She as per her own averments, had got married to Mr. John Fletcher in the year 1995 and got divorced from him in the year 30.09.2001. Thus, the appellant is a divorcee. {Para 16}

17. The claim for maintenance has been made under Section 21 of HAMA which provides for the dependents who may claim maintenance.

18. It provides for 9 categories of relatives in which the “divorced

daughter” does not feature. An unmarried or widowed daughter is recognized to have a claim in the estate of the deceased, but a “divorced daughter” does not feature in the category of dependents entitled to maintenance.

19. The appellant being a divorcee has a claim for maintenance against her husband even after her divorce. The appellant being conscious of her right of maintenance against the husband, has sought to explain that since her husband is not traceable, she is unable to claim maintenance from him. However difficult situation as it may be, but under the HAMA as she is not a “dependent” as defined under the Act and thus not entitled to claim maintenance from her mother and brother.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

MAT.APP.(F.C.) 89/2018

MALINI CHAUDHRI  Vs RANJIT CHAUDHRI & ANR. 

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KUMAR KAIT

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA

Author: NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA, J

Pronounced on: 13th September, 2023.

Print Page

Whether one of dependent of landlord can prove his bonafide need?

The Division Bench in the case of Nathulal Gangabaks Khandelwal held that bona fide need of a landlord was a matter which could be proved by any evidence; there was nothing in the provisions of the Rent Act which required the landlord to adduce his own evidence for proving his bona fide need. In the absence of any specific provision to that effect, the facts constituting a bona fide need could be proved by the landlord by adducing any evidence which satisfies the Court or the Rent Controller. It may be that certain facts, which are needed to be established as per the requirements of the Rent Act, in this behalf, are in the personal knowledge of the landlord alone. In that case, he may have to step into the witness box to prove these facts and the Court or the authority concerned may not accept any other evidence. But barring such a case, if the facts in dispute could be, and are, established by any other competent witness other than the landlord by examining himself, the landlord cannot be visited with the fatal consequence of adverse inference, if he omits to personally step into the witness box. So also, in the case of Mangesh Govind Patane, the learned Single Judge held that so long as the witness had the personal knowledge of the bona fide requirement of the landlord, he could very well step into the witness box and prove the same. The Court particularly held that the expression "himself used in section 13(1)(g) of the Rent Act had been defined to mean not only the landlord alone but also his wife and children. It would cover the case of a family and all persons staying together including dependents and other relation of the landlord. If one of these dependants steps into the witness box and proves bona fide need of the landlord not only for himself but for his dependents including the witness, there is no reason why his evidence should not be accepted by the Court.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY (NAGPUR BENCH)

W.P. No. 3973 of 2015

Decided On: 25.09.2017

 Premchand Vs.  Murtuzakhan Rahmankhan

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

S.C. Gupte, J.

Citation: 2018(4) MHLJ 295

Print Page

Whether married sister can claim compensation on account of accidental death of her brother even though she was not dependent on him?

“10. As observed by this Court in Custodian of
Branches of BANCO National Ultramarino v. Nalini
Bai Naique [1989]2SCR810 the definition contained in
Section 2(11) CPC is inclusive in character and its
scope is wide, it is not confined to legal heirs only.
Instead it stipulates that a person who may or may not

be legal heir competent to inherit the property of the
deceased can represent the estate of the deceased
person. It includes heirs as well as persons who
represent the estate even without title either as
executors or administrators in possession of the estate
of the deceased. All such persons would be covered by
the expression 'legal representative'. As observed in
Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation v.
Ramanbhai Prabhatbhai and Anr. [1987]3SCR404 a
legal representative is one who suffers on account of
death of a person due to a motor vehicle accident and
need not necessarily be a wife, husband, parent and
child.
11. There are several factors which have to be noted.
The liability under Section 140 of the Act does not cease
because there is absence of dependency. The right to file
a claim application has to be considered in the
background of right to entitlement.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
FAO No. 4260 of 2008(O&M)
Date of decision : May 08, 2014
Charanjit Kaur ..... Appellant
v.
Suresh Kumar and others ..... Respondents

CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI
Citation; 2016(2) ALLMR (JOURNAL) 17

Print Page

Whether husband can be denied compensation due to accidental death of his wife if he was not dependent on his wife?

 The submission of the learned counsel for the appellant that
respondent no.1 – claimant i.e the husband of the deceased was earning at
the relevant time and as such was not dependent on the income of his wife
cannot be accepted, in view of the evidence that has come on record. No
doubt, the first respondent – claimant was working in the Irrigation
Department and was drawing a monthly salary of Rs.55,000/- per month,
out of which Rs.10,000/- odd was being deducted towards various
deductions including statutory deductions. According to the evidence that

has come on record, the deceased would spend her entire salary on the
family members and was also paying for her children's education. There is
no serious challenge to this part of the evidence that has come on record.
In this day and age, considering the cost of living, the income of both the
husband and wife are equally important for running the house as they
supplement each other's income. It cannot be generally said that as the other
spouse (surviving) is earning, there is no dependency. When a husband and
wife, with separate incomes are living together and sharing their expenses,
and in consequence thereof, their joint living expenses are less than twice
the expenses of each living separately, then each, by the fact of sharing is
conferring a benefit on the other. This results in higher savings. In case, one
spouse loses the benefit of contribution rendered by the other in managing
the household, in such a situation, the surviving spouse would be entitled to
compensation for loss of dependency (for loss of services rendered in
managing households). In the present case, it has come in the evidence that
the deceased was contributing her entire salary for the household needs
including for the education of her two sons, who were studying at the
relevant time. The said evidence as noted earlier has gone unchallenged.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
FIRST APPEAL NO.1271 OF 2014
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3156 OF 2014
(FOR STAY)
IN
FIRST APPEAL NO.1271 OF 2014
The New India Assurance Company Limited

 Versus
Sunil Parsharam Garud

CORAM : A. S. OKA &
 REVATI MOHITE DERE, JJ.


 PRONOUNCED ON : 29th OCTOBER 2015.
Citation;2016(2) ALLMR354

Print Page

Whether a divorced wife is widow after death of husband?

A widow is a woman, as we
understand from the meaning of the term in its ordinary sense, whose
husband is dead and who has not married again. A man is husband of
a woman only as long as there is no snapping of matrimonial relations
by a divorce a vinculo or dissolution of marriage or death.

 In the case of Smt. Rambai Vs. Ramesh Kumar reported at
AIR 1996 M.P. 144 cited before me by learned Counsel for the
appellants, the meaning assigned to the word 'widow' in 'Words and
Phrases” Permanent Edition, Vol.45 page 141 has been approved by
the learned Single Judge of Madhya Pradesh High Court. The learned
Judge has held that, “Where husband and wife are divorced a vinculo,
the wife after the husband's death is not his 'widow' ....” The relevant
observations of the learned Judge are to be found in paragraph 12 and
same are reproduced thus;
“.......In 'Words and Phrases” Permanent Edition, Vol.45
page 141 under the heading 'divorced wife', the word
'widow' means a woman who has lost her husband by
death and has no application to a divorced woman.
Where husband and wife are divorced a vinculo, the wife
after the husband's death is not his 'widow' and entitled
to dower..”
 In view of the above, the argument of learned Counsel for
the respondent that respondent is a widow and dependant of the
deceased cannot be accepted and argument of learned Counsel for the
appellants in this regard needs to be upheld. I, therefore, find that in
the instant case, for the purpose of enquiry under the Act, 1923, the
respondent cannot be said to be enjoying the status of widow of
deceased Kishore. Once we find that so far as the enquiry under the

Act, 1923 is concerned, the respondent was not the widow of deceased
Kishore, she would be out of the scope and ambit of the definition of
the term, 'dependent' as given in Section 2(1)(d) of the Workmen's
Compensation Act, 1923, which describes, inter alia, a widow of a
deceased workman as his dependant.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR
FIRST APPEAL NO. 544 OF 2013

Smt. Varsha Kishore Tode Vs  Smt. Vandana Kishore Tode

Citation; 2014(4) MHLJ 206 Bom
CORAM : S. B. SHUKRE, J.
DATED : JANUARY 09, 2014.

Print Page