Parents of a deceased married daughter are entitled to compensation as legal representatives under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, regardless of dependency status.

Judgment :

Sanjay K. Agrawal J.

1. Since common question of law and facts is available in all these three appeals, therefore, they have been clubbed together, heard together and are being decided by this common judgment.

2. On 20/05/2016, a road accident occurred in which three persons died namely Rita, Birbahadur and Durga Prasad. For the death of Rita, her parents namely Biranchi Bai and Dilbharan filed claim case No. 221/2016 before the 3^rd Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ambikapur under Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter, the Act of 1988) wherein by impugned award dated 19/05/2017, the Claims Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs. 50,000/- and fastened the liability of payment of compensation upon the Insurance Company against which MAC/958/2017 has been preferred by the appellants/claimants seeking enhancement of compensation and cross-appeal under Order 41 Rule 22 of CPC read with Section 242(3) of Chhattisgarh Motor Vehicle Rules, 1994 has been filed by the Insurance Company. For the death of Birbahadur, his parents namely Premsai and Mundi bai filed claim case No. 123/2016 before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Surajpur under Section 166 of the Act of 1988 wherein by impugned award dated 07/04/2018, the Claims Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs. 6,78,000/- in favour of the claimants and after finding the breach of terms and conditions of the insurance policy, proceeded to exonerate the Insurance Company and fastened the liability of payment of compensation upon the owner of the vehicle namely Gangeshwar Ram. For the death of Durga Prasad, his wife, son and parents namely Sanira Bai, Harish, Basanti and Ramnath filed claim case No. 122/2016 before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Surajpur wherein by impugned award dated 07/04/2018, the Claims Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs. 7,18,000/- in favour of the claimants and fastened the payment of liability of compensation upon the owner of the vehicle namely Gangeshwar Ram and the Insurance Company has been exonerated. We shall discuss and decide each of these three appeals one by one.

Submission of the parties :-

3. Mr. C. Jayant K. Rao, learned counsel for the appellants/claimants in MAC/958/2017, would submit that the Claims Tribunal, Ambikapur is absolutely unjustified in holding that claimants, being parents of deceased married daughter, would not be entitled for compensation under loss of dependency as there are not her dependents after marriage, as such, the impugned award may be modified and the compensation amount may suitably be enhanced. Moreover, the cross-objection filed by the Insurance Company against co-respondent – owner of the vehicle namely Gangeshwar Ram would not be maintainable.

4. Mr. H.P. Agrawal, learned counsel for the respondent –Insurance Company, would submit that it is a case where the vehicle was being plied in breach of terms and conditions of the insurance policy, therefore, the Insurance Company would not be liable for compensation to the claimants and further the cross-objection preferred by the Insurance Company in MAC/958/2017 would be maintainable in light