JUDGMENT :

S.M. MODAK, J.

1. The issue involved in this appeal is about entitlement of widow to the compensation who got remarried during the pendency of the petition before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as the “Tribunal” for the sake of brevity). What is the effect of a marriage of widow on her right to claim compensation on account of death of her husband in a vehicular accident? Whether due to marriage, her right vanishes? Further, issue is whether an earning wife can be said to be dependent of her husband?

2. The Tribunal at Buldhana has not rejected her claim on account of remarriage, but while apportioning the amount, has allotted less share to her. The Insurance Company is aggrieved by the said decision dated 17/06/2017 and they had come in appeal. Their main two contentions are:

(i) the widow was working since beginning and she was earning separately and as such she is not depending on the income of her deceased husband.

(ii) she lost her right to compensation on account of remarriage during pendency of the petition.

The Tribunal rejected both the contentions. Her contention was she is one of the legal representative of the deceased and as such she is entitled (irrespective of the fact of her separate earning). Right to claim compensation has accrued to her on the date of accident and she cannot be divested of such right on account of remarriage. On her own, she had not given evidence of her separate earning. Insurance company brought it on record by examining necessary witness.

3. I have heard learned Advocate Smt. Mrunal Naik for the Insurance Company/appellant and learned Advocate Shri Dharmadhikari for the widow, minor son and a daughter/respondent Nos. 1 to 3. Though respondent No. 5 mother-in-law of deceased appeared, she has not remained present through their Advocate at the time of hearing. Respondent No. 4 father-in-law expired and Respondent No. 6 is the owner of offending vehicle. He had chosen to remain absent.

4. This appeal was taken up for final hearing by consent. There were two applications bearing Civil Application [CAF] No. 1185/2020 and Civil Application [CAF] No. 1186/2020 for withdrawal of the amount of compensation. Initially, it was agreed to hear the appeal finally. Hearing was also started. It took some time. Hence by consent, I have decided both the applications on 06/10/2020. And then remaining final arguments were heard.

5. The facts about accident, negligence were disputed before the Tribunal. The tribunal gave findings against the Insurance Company. They are not disputed in this appeal. So entire focus is on following issues:

(a) Whether separate earnings of widow has got any bearing on her right to claim compensation?

(b) Whether remarriage of widow disentitles her from claiming compensation?

ABOUT THE ACCIDENT

6. For better understanding I will narrate few facts about the accident. Deceased Narayan was driving motorcycle along with his wife Pushpa/respondent No. 1 as pillion rider. The accident took place on a road proceeding towards Buldhana. The offending vehicle truck owned by present respondent No. 6 dashed the motorcycle from backside. There was a dispute raised before the Tribunal by the Insurance Company about manner of accident (owner has not contested). Insurance Company contended that in fact the motor cycle hits the truck from rear side. The company has not given any oral evidence. But they relied upon the contents of spot Panchanama. They tried to plead that if the truck would dash the motor cycle from backside, what would be the damage. They tried to plead that nature of damage caused to the truck and motor cycle corroborates the story of accident put up by the Insurance Company.

7. Before the Tribunal, on the point of manner of accident, two types of evidence were available. One is oral testimony of eyewitness Pushpa and another is, contents of spot pan