Back
1998 Supreme(P&H) 1480
PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT
G.C.Garg, J.
Rajinder Pal Sharma
Versus
Jaswant Singh
First Appeal from the Order No. 34 of 1997,
Decided On : NOVEMBER 27, 1998
The income of a deceased person's spouse cannot be considered in assessing the dependency of the deceased person's parents on the deceased person.
Headnote:
MOTOR VEHICLES ACT - SECTION 166 - DEPENDENCY - PARENTS OF DECEASED SON ENTITLED TO COMPENSATION - INCOME OF DECEASED DAUGHTER-IN-LAW NOT TO BE CONSIDERED FOR ASSESSING DEPENDENCY.
Fact of the Case:
Ishwar Dutt and his wife Anju Bala died in a road accident. Their parents filed two separate claim petitions under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, one for the death of their son and the other for the death of their daughter-in-law. The Claims Tribunal awarded compensation to the parents only for the death of their son, holding that they were not dependent on their daughter-in-law. The parents appealed the decision, arguing that the income of their daughter-in-law should have been considered in assessing their dependency on their son.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the parents were not entitled to compensation for the death of their daughter-in-law because they were not dependent on her. The court also held that the income of the daughter-in-law could not be considered in assessing the dependency of the parents on their son because there was no evidence of her income in the claim petition for the death of their son.
Issues: 1. Whether the parents were entitled to compensation for the death of their daughter-in-law. 2. Whether the income of the daughter-in-law could be considered in assessing the dependency of the parents on their son.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the parents were not entitled to compensation for the death of their daughter-in-law because they were not dependent on her. The court reasoned that the daughter-in-law was presumed to have been contributing her income to her husband and not to her parents-in-law, especially during the lifetime of her husband. 2. The court held that the income of the daughter-in-law could not be considered in assessing the dependency of the parents on their son because there was no evidence of her income in the claim petition for the death of their son.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the appeal and upheld the decision of the Claims Tribunal.
G.C.Garg, J.
1. This order will dispose of F.A.Os. 34 and 35 of 1997 as the same are directed against two awards passed by the Claims Tribunal on 2.9.1996 in two separate claim petitions under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act which arose out of the same accident.
2. Ishwar Dutt and his wife Anju Bala died in a road accident which took place on 12.4.1993. Rajinder Pal Sharma, Chander Kanta Sharma, Jagmohan Sharma and Devi Nagar, father, mother, brother and married sister respectively of Ishwar Dutt filed a claim petition being MACT Case No. 19 of 1993 claiming compensation for the death of Ishwar Dutt. It was alleged that they were dependent upon Ishwar Dutt and thus entitled to compensation. Another claim petition being MACT Case No. 18 of 1993 was also filed by Rajinder Pal Sharma, Chander Kanta Sharma, Narinder Kumar and Santosh, father-in-law, mother-inlaw, father and the mother respectively of Anju Bala claiming compensation for the death of Anju Bala. They also alleged that they were dependent upon the deceased and thus entitled to compensation.
3. Claims Tribunal disposed of the two claim petitions by two separate awards passed on 2.9.1996. In claim petition 19 of 1993, Claims Tribunal on a consideration of the matter came to the conclusion that out of the four claimants, only the parents of Ishwar Dutt can be said to be dependent upon him and thus they are only entitled to compensation for the death of their son Ishwar Dutt and claimants Jagmohan Sharma and Devi Nagar who are brother and the sister of Ishwar Dutt cannot be said to be dependent on their brother Ishwar Dutt and they were thus not entitled to any compensation. Claims Tribunal after appreciating the evidence produced on the record further came to the conclusion that deceased Ishwar Dutt was earning a sum of Rs. 5,000/- per month and out of this amount he might be spending Rs. 4,000/- on his own family and contributing only a sum of Rs. 1,000/- per month to his parents. The parents of Ishwar Dutt were thus held to be dependent on their son to the extent of Rs. 1,000/- per month. Claims Tribunal keeping in view the age of deceased and his parents, adopted a multiplier of 10 and thus awarded a total compensation of Rs. 1,20,000/- (Rs.1,000 x 12 x 10) in favour of Rajinder Pal Sharma and Chander Kanta Sharma only, with interest.
4. Another Claim petition 18 of 1993 was dismissed by rejecting the claim of the claimants in toto. Claims Tribunal came to the conclusion that the claimants who are father-in-law, mother-in-law, father and the mother of Anju Bala deceased were not at all dependent on her and, therefore, they were not entitled to any compensation.
5. Peeling aggrieved by the two awards aforesaid, only the father and the mother (claimants 1 and 2 in both the claim petitions) of Ishwar Dutt filed these two appeals. F.A.O. 34 of 1997 was filed against the award passed in respect of the claim for the death of their son Ishwar Dutt for seeking enhancement of compensation. F.A.O. 35 of 1997 was filed challenging the award passed in the claim petition for seeking compensation in respect of the death of their daughter-in-law Anju Bala. The brother and the sister of Ishwar Dutt, Claimants 3 and 4 in Claim Petition 19 of 1993, and the parents of Anju Bala, Claimants 3 and 4 in Claim Petition 18 of 1993 have not preferred any appeal against the awards passed in their respective petitions.
6. It is in these circumstances the two appeals are being disposed of by a single order.
7. First, I take up F.A.O. 35 of 1993 preferred by the father-in-law and the mother-in-law of Anju Bala challenging the award of the Claims Tribunal whereby their claim petition has been dismissed.
8. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and on a consideration of the matter, I am of the opinion that under the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act, the appellants in this appeal are not entitled to any compensation for the death of their daughter-in-law. As noticed above, I
