Insurers can be held primarily liable for compensation in cases where vehicle owners remain ex-parte; married daughters are recognized as dependents for compensation calculations.

JUDGMENT :

T.M.NADAF, J.

This appeal is filed by the insurer calling in question the judgment and award passed on 05.04.2023 in MVC No.426/2020, by Addl. Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Bidar and MACT, Bidar on ground of liability and quantum.

2. Heard Sri Sudharshan M., learned counsel for appellant and Sri Basavaraj R Math, learned counsel for respondents No.1 to 6.

3. Sri Sudharshan M., learned counsel taking this Court through the judgment and award passed by tribunal would contend that owner of the vehicle remained ex-parte. Police have registered case against the driver of the offending vehicle invoking provisions of Section 181 of M.V. Act and Section 184 of M.V. Act against the owner of the offending vehicle. Owner of offending vehicle remained ex-parte and not challenged the provisions stated supra. The insurance company examined its officials to prove their case that the owner engaged the driver, who did not have a valid driving license. However, Tribunal has not considered said aspect of the matter and fastened liability on the insurance company to pay compensation at first instance and recover the same later, from the owner of offending vehicle. To buttress his arguments he lied on judgment of Division Bench of this Court in MFA No.6154/2019 dated 14.12.2023 and MFA No.3297/2019 dated 13.04.2023 contending that, if the case is made out that the owner of the offending vehicle permitted the person not having valid driving license to drive, then insurance company is not liable to pay the compensation. It is the owner of the offending vehicle, i.e. insured, who is liable to pay compensation. Insofar as, Tribunal having considered the married daughters as dependants of deceased, he submits that daughters were married and had gone out of family and hence, they are not entitled to be considered as dependents on the deceased. To buttress his arguments, he relied on judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in case of Deep Shikha and Anr. v. National Insurance Company Ltd. And Ors., in Special Leave Petition (Civil) Nos.22265-22266/2018 decided on 13.06.2025, particularly on paragraphs No.13 and 14, where it is held that married daughters are not entitled to be considered as dependants on the deceased while considering deduction towards personal expenses. On these grounds, he sought to allow the appeal and set aside the judgment and order passed by Tribunal fastening liability on the insurance company to pay compensation at first instance and recover same from the insured.

4. Refuting the submission of learned counsel for appellant, Sri Basavaraj R Math, contended that the facts of the case in the judgments relied upon by counsel for appellants and facts of case on hand are entirely different. In case of judgment of Division Bench of this Court, there is clear finding that the insurer consciously or knowingly well of the fact that the driver of the offending vehicle was not holding valid driving license, engaged him to drive the vehicle. Those are the circumstances, under which Division Bench passed an order that the insurance company is not liable to pay compensation. Insofar as contention about married daughters is concerned, the judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in the cases of National Insurance Company Limited v. Birendra and Ors., [(2020) 11 SCC 356] and Seema Rani and Ors. v. Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. and Ors., [2025 INSC 192] are not brought to the notice of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Deepsikha Supra. In both cases, Hon’ble Apex Court has considered the fact that even major married earning sons and married daughters are entitled to be counted as dependants of the decease