Daughter Can Seek Compensation For Father's Death In Motor Vehicle Accident Irrespective Of Her Marital Status: Andhra Pradesh HC
The Andhra Pradesh High Court has held that a daughter, whether married or unmarried, is a legal heir and therefore, a married daughter is entitled to stake a claim for compensation on the death of her father on account of a motor vehicle accident.A Single Judge Bench of the High Court comprising Justice VRK Krupa Sagar however clarified,“...eligibility to claim is one thing and as to how...
The Andhra Pradesh High Court has held that a daughter, whether married or unmarried, is a legal heir and therefore, a married daughter is entitled to stake a claim for compensation on the death of her father on account of a motor vehicle accident.
A Single Judge Bench of the High Court comprising Justice VRK Krupa Sagar however clarified,
“...eligibility to claim is one thing and as to how much is to be granted towards loss of dependency is another aspect. Every heir may not be dependent. Non-heirs may also be dependent. Simply because a daughter is married does not completely cease to be dependent. To what extent she is dependent on her father is a matter of fact and it is that fact which is required to be pleaded and proved and considered in such claims.”
The Court was dealing with an appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 by the Insurance Company. Another appeal was preferred by the second wife of the deceased.
As per factual matrix of the case, the deceased, a public health worker earning a monthly salary of Rs. 6728/-, was run over by milk van. His married daughter and the second wife claimed a total of Rs. 4,00,000/- as compensation from the owner of the offending vehicle and the Insurance Company. The Claims Tribunal, however, awarded a total of Rs.3,77,000/- with an interest of 7.5% per annum as compensation to the married daughter and the second wife. The amount was to be paid by the owner of the offending vehicle and the Insurance Company.
The Insurance Company argued that- (i) the compensation awarded was excessive, (ii) at the time of the occurrence of the accident, the driver of the offending vehicle did not have a valid and effective driving license, thereby, leading to a breach of the insurance policy, and (iii) the married daughter was not a dependant and hence, not entitled to compensation. Additionally, the second wife was also not entitled to compensation.
The second wife of the deceased also filed an appeal against the order of the Claim Tribunal seeking enhancement of compensation on the grounds that the compensation awarded was not just and that it failed to include any amount incurred towards funeral expenses and loss of consortium.
Consequently, the following issues were tabled before the High Court for its consideration- (i) whether the married daughter is not entitled to compensation?, (ii) whether a second wife was a dependant of the deceased?, (iii) whether there was a fundamental breach of insurance policy since the driver of the alleged offending vehicle did not have valid and effective driving licence?
On the claim of the married daughter to compensation, the Court asserted that the term legal representative, though not defined by the Motor Vehicles Act, is defined under Section 2(11) of the Code of Civil Procedure which is an inclusive definition that includes heirs of the deceased within the ambit of legal representatives.
As the compensation that could be granted on death of an individual in a motor accident becomes the “estate of the deceased”, the Court held that a married daughter, similarly, is entitled to a stake in compensation on account of death of her father. Reliance was placed on the Supreme Court's judgment in National Insurance Company Limited v. Birender (2020), where it was held that a legal representative is one who suffers from death of a person due to a motor vehicle accident and the Claims Tribunal is duty bound to consider the evidence and determine the extent of dependency.
On the claim and extent of compensation which the second wife is entitled to, the Court noted that the second wife was not living with her husband and had been in receipt of pension on the death of her husband, which limited the extent of her dependency. While she was entitled to compensation, the Court observed,
“Being wife, she was also entitled to claim compensation as she was one of the legal heirs/legal representatives. However, her own evidence disclosed that she fell into dispute with her husband during his lifetime and they were living separately and she has been in receipt of family pension on his death. Thus, she could maintain herself. Her dependency on her husband was very limited.”
Thus, the Court refused to interfere with the quantum of compensation granted to the second wife by the Claim Tribunal.
On the issue of breach of insurance policy, the Court held,
“It is expected that whoever drives the vehicle will drive it in accordance with law which includes holding a valid and effective driving licence to drive it. It can be said that one who alleges that a driver drove the vehicle without a driving licence may have to prove the same. Insurance company contended that the offending vehicle was driven by the driver without a valid driving licence. From the evidence on record, it was rightly concluded by the Claims Tribunal that the insurance company which had the onus of proof failed to discharge its burden. Therefore, it is right to think that the driver was holding valid and effective driving licence at the material point of time. In such circumstances, there was no fundamental breach of Ex.B.1-insurance policy.”
Dismissing the writ petition, the Court enhanced the compensation awarded by Rs.63,000/-. The revised compensation of Rs. 440000/- was to be paid jointly and severally by the owner of the offending vehicle and the Insurance Company.
Case Details:
Case Number: MOTOR ACCIDENT CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 3158/2014 and MOTOR ACCIDENT CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 205/2025
Case Name: The United India Insurance Co Ltd v. Karu Nukalamma
Date: Date: 25.03.2025