Skip to main content

Married girl’s parents can be heirs

 Parents of a married daughter can be considered her legal heirs, the Bombay high court has said.

The HC was hearing a compensation claim application filed by an elderly Mumbai couple after their 19-year-old married daughter died in a road accident 13 years ago, Justice A P Bhangale asked the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (MACT) to rehear the case.

"Reading the provision as it is, any legal heir is entitled to claim compensation awardable under the Motor Vehicles Act," said Justice Bhangale. "Prima facie, it cannot be said that the parents of the victim, though she was married, were not her legal heirs, particularly when her husband was no more living." The judge said that the question needs full consideration and directed the MACT to hear the application and decide on it within six months.

On November 4, 2000, Sneha Vaikar (19) and her husband died in an accident. Their minor son suffered serious injuries. Her parents Subhayadra and Manohar Ghule filed a Rs 3 lakh compensation claim before the MACT. They said Vaikar was earning Rs 3,000 a month at the time of her death. But, the MACT dismissed the plea. It also said that the addresses given by the Ghules were different—one showed their residence in Mumbai whereas another was a Navi Mumbai address. The Ghules then filed an appeal before the HC.

The HC said the MACT couldn't take a hyper technical view of the matter. "The Motor Vehicle Act is a special statute with social welfare objectives. The jurisdiction of the MACT having regard to the terminologies used in the Act must be held to be wider than the civil court," said the judge, while ruling that the MACT had erred in refusing to entertain the Ghules' application.

Article referred: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/mumbai/Married-girls-parents-can-be-heirs/articleshow/23997695.cms

Comments

Most viewed this month

Amendment of plaint under Order VI Rule 17 of the CPC explained

Cause Title :  Ganesh Prasad vs Rajeshwar Prasad, SLP (C) NO. 28377 OF 2018, Supreme Court Of India Date of Judgment/Order : 14/3/2023 Corum : J. B. Pardiwala, J. Citied:  Revajeetu Builders and Developers v. Narayanaswamy & Sons and Others reported in (2009) 10 SCC 84 North Eastern Railway Administration, Gorakhpur v. Bhagwan Das reported in (2008) 8 SCC 511 P.A. Jayalakshmi v. H. Saradha and Others reported in (2009) 14 SCC 525 B.K. Narayana Pillai v. Parameswaran Pillai and Another reported in (2000) 1 SCC 712 A.K. Gupta and Sons Ltd. v. Damodar Valley Corporation reported in AIR 1967 SC 96 Life Insurance Corporation of India v. Sanjeev Builders Private Limited and Another, Civil Appeal No. 5909 of 2022 dated 01.09.2022 Firm Sriniwas Ram Kumar v. Mahabir Prasad and Others reported in AIR 1951 SC 177 G. Nagamma and Another v. Siromanamma and Another reported in (1996) 2 SCC 25 Praful Manohar Rele v. Krishnabai Narayan Ghosalkar and Others reported in (2014...

Owner of vehicle is not expected to verify the genuineness of the driving license before appointing a driver

Cause Title : Rishi Pal Singh Versus New India Assurance Co. Ltd & Ors., Civil Appeal No. 4919 Of 2022, The Supreme Court Of India Date of Judgment/Order : July 26, 2022 Corum : Hemant Gupta; J., Vikram Nath; J. Background the truck owned by the appellant met with an accident. The owner deposed before the court that before employing the driver, he had taken his driving test and that he was driving the vehicle satisfactorily and  that the driver was employed with him for 3 years before the date of the accident. He produced his driving license. This was reaffirmed by the driver who deposed that the driving license was obtained from the driver and it was issued from Nagaland, but no such license was produced on record. Both the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal and the High Court have held that the owner has alleged that the driver had a driving license from Nagaland but the same was not produced and therefore, the Insurance Company is entitled to recover the awarded amount...

The recovery of vehicles by the financier not an offence - SC

Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 8907  of 2009 Anup Sarmah (Petitioner) Vs Bhola Nath Sharma & Ors.(Respondents) The petitioner submitted that  respondents-financer had forcibly taken away the vehicle financed by them and  illegally deprived the petitioner from its lawful possession  and  thus,  committed  a crime. The complaint filed by the petitioner had been  entertained  by  the Judicial Magistrate (Ist Class), Gauhati (Assam) in Complaint Case  No.  608 of 2009, even directing the interim custody of the vehicle (Maruti  Zen)  be given to the petitioner vide order dated  17.3.2009.  The respondent on approaching the Guwahati High  Court against this order, the hon'ble court squashed the criminal  proceedings  pending   before  the  learned Magistrate. After hearing both sides, the Hon'ble Supreme Court decided on 30th...