Supreme Court Holds Major Children and Married Daughter Can Be Dependants; Raises Award To Rs.37.8 Lakh

A bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and Prashant Kumar Mishra heard an appeal against the Punjab & Haryana High Court's April 27, 2023 order in FAO No.995/2017 arising out of a MACT award, concerning whether major sons and a married daughter of a deceased motor accident victim qualified as dependants and the correct quantum of compensation.

The Court allowed the civil appeal and held that the High Court erred in excluding the major children and the married daughter from the list of dependants. It accepted that the claims of the adult children required consideration in light of this Court's precedents and ordered a fresh calculation of compensation, increasing the award to Rs.37,80,681/-. The Court directed interest to be paid as originally awarded by the Tribunal and disposed of pending applications. The Court, in its reasoning, observed: "We are unable to agree with the view taken by the Tribunal on the dependents of the deceased. This Court in National Insurance Company Limited v. Birender & Ors., had expounded that major married and earning sons of the deceased, being legal representatives, have a right to apply for compensation, and the Tribunal must consider the application, irrespective of whether the representatives are fully dependent on the deceased or not. The Court went on to conclude that since the sons, in that case, were earning merely Rs.1,50,000/- per annum, they were largely dependent on the earnings of the deceased and were staying with her." The Court further noted that "it cannot be said that they were self-sufficient or independent of the deceased."

Background

The dispute arose from a fatal collision on May 13, 2015, in which Dev Raj (aged 50) died after a bus driven by Narinder Singh struck his scooter. The claimants — wife, daughter and two sons — filed a petition before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT), Bathinda, seeking Rs.50 lakh. The MACT awarded Rs.24,36,155/- (income of the deceased taken at Rs.23,345/- per month) and held all four claimants as dependants. Separate appeals were filed by the claimants and by the insurer, The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd.

The High Court partly allowed both appeals: it accepted the claimants' plea to grant future prospects at 30% but allowed the insurer's contention that the major sons and the married daughter were not dependants, applying a 50% deduction. The High Court thus modified the award to Rs.24,44,183/-. The claimants challenged the exclusion of adult children and the married daughter before this Court.

Relying on the Court's precedents, including National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Birender and principles applied in Pranay Sethi and related decisions on calculation methodology, the Supreme Court concluded that the adult children were not self-sufficient given their employment status and residence with the deceased. The Court therefore reinstated their dependent status and ordered recalculation of compensation applying future prospects at 30%, a 1/4 deduction in accordance with Pranay Sethi, and multiplier 13. The recalculation produced the revised award; interest was directed to remain as fixed by the Tribunal. No precedent was overruled; the Court applied and distinguished earlier authorities to the facts before it. The civil appeal was allowed and the impugned MACT award, as modified by the High Court, was further modified accordingly.

Case Details: Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL NO. 2323 OF 2025 (Arising out of SLP(C) No. 444 of 2025) Case Title: SEEMA RANI & ORS. v. THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. & ORS. Appearances: For the Petitioner(s): Not indicated For the Respondent(s): Not indicated