Skip to main content

Equal right for compensation to mother,father of accident

The Madras High Court bench here today ruled that under Motor Accidents Claims Act, both mother and father of a spinster, who died in a road accident, had equal right to claim compensation.

Justice S Vimala on a compensation case filed by Sivappan, father of Kaliammal who died in an accident, said "the mother of the woman has as much right as the father of the woman in claiming the compensation".

The mother S Parasakthi also could include herself as one of the claimants before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, the Judge said.

Parasakthi was added as a claimant along with other legal heirs only after the death of Sivbappan. "Even at the time when the petition was filed claiming compensation, unfortunately, the mother, though alive, had not been added as a legal heir of the deceased", the judge said.

Only after the death of Sivappan, Parasakthi had been brought on record as legal heir of her deceased husband.

The mother of the deceased ought to have been on record already in the capacity as legal heir. Therefore, the major amount of compensation had to be paid only to Parasakthi, the judge said.

The judge pointed out that the accident had occurred when the victim was travelling in a trailer attached to a tractor. The driver admitted his negligence and hence a tribunal in Sankarankovil had on April 31, 2002 directed the insurance company to pay a compensation of Rs 2.92 lakh.

The Judge agreed with the insurance company that it was not liable for the driver's mistake of having allowed the woman labourer to travel in the trailer. However, the insurance company should pay the compensation first and then recover it from the tractor owner, the judge said.

The Judge said the tribunal had also wrongly calculated compensation amount by taking the age of the deceased and not that of the claimants under consideration and reduced the amount from Rs.2.92 lakh to Rs.1.84 lakh. Major portion of this should be given to the mother, the judge said.

Article referred: http://www.business-standard.com/article/pti-stories/equal-right-for-compensation-to-mother-father-of-accident-114102500538_1.html

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...