Major married and earning children of a deceased have the right to claim compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, irrespective of their dependency status.

JUDGMENT :

1. The appellant Insurance Company, who is original respondent No.3 in Motor Accident Claim Petition No.232/2012, has challenged the judgment and award dated 07.04.2017 passed in the aforesaid claim petition by learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Dhule (hereinafter referred to as "the learned Tribunal"), on the only ground that whether major son and daughter, who are not dependent on the income of deceased, can claim compensation on the ground of loss of dependency.

2. It is not disputed that one Sharubala Ravikiran Zol died in an accident which took place on 09.02.2012 when she was going from Dondaicha by-pass road alongwith her husband. It is also not in dispute that initially the motor accident claim petition in respect of deceased Sharubala was filed by her husband Ravikiran and son Tejas. However, during pendency of the claim petition, the husband of deceased died, and therefore, the claim petition was prosecuted by Tejas and Urjja, who are respectively son anddaughter of the deceased. It is to be noted here that the learned tribunal awarded total amount of compensation of Rs.42,27,824/- inclusive of the award under Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act on the principle of “no fault liability” alongwith interest at the rate of Rs. 8% per annum from the date of petition till its realization. The learned tribunal computed the amount of compensation as per the direction of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Sarla Verma. There is no dispute about the income of deceased at the time of accident being of Rs. 46,623/- after deduction of income tax and professional tax. The only point raised by the appellant Insurance Company is, as to whether the major son and daughter who are not depending upon the income of deceased, can claim loss of dependency or can file a petition for claiming compensation under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act.

3. Learned Counsel for the appellant Insurance Company vehemently argued that the learned tribunal has definitely erred in granting compensation to the respondents/ claimants who were in fact not dependent on the income of deceased as they were residing separately from the deceased at the time of accident and earning their own income. Forthat purpose learned Counsel for the appellant Insurance Company heavily relied on the following judgments.

(i) Judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court dated 04.12.2023 in the case of The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. vs. Anand Pal & Ors. in SLP (Civil) No. 7805 of 2022

(ii) New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Jaibai & Ors., MANU/MH/4417/2022

(iii) National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi & Ors., (2017) 16 SCC 680

(iv) Sarla Verma and Ors. vs Delhi Transport Corporation and Another, (2009) 6 SCC 121

(v) Farzana Abbas Bhai & Anr. vs. Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation, 2017 (1) TAC 288 (Bom.)

4. On the contrary, learned Counsel for respondent Nos.1 and 2/claimants strongly opposed the submissions made on behalf of the appellant Insurance Company. He pointed out that the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of New India Assurance Co. vs Anand Pal (supra) is not at all applicable in the instant case, since it did not refer the earlier judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of National Insurance Company Ltd vs Birender & Ors., (2020) AIR (SC) 434. According to him, the view taken by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Birender dated 13.01.2020 has now been reiterated in the recent judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Seema Rani & Ors. vs. The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. & Ors. dated 11.02.2025 in Civil Appeal No. 2323 of 2025. He also submitted that the Hon’ble Apex Court in case of Seema Rani (supra) has, not only held that major sons and daughters of the deceased, irrespective of their dependency status, can apply for getting compensation, but the quantum of compensation can also be recalculated if certain heads are left out by the learned tribunal/Court. As such, he urged for recalculating