Brothers Can Claim Compensation in Accident Deaths, Rules Gujarat High Court
L'essentiel
Gujarat High Court ruled brothers of accident victims can claim compensation even if not financially dependent, as being a legal representative is sufficient under the Motor Vehicles Act.
Résumé généré par IA
AI generated image
NEW DELHI: The Gujarat high court has ruled that brothers of a person killed in a road accident can claim compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act even if they were not financially dependent on the deceased. Justice Mool Chand Tyagi held that being a legal representative is sufficient to maintain a claim, and financial dependency is not a mandatory requirement.
What was the dispute about? On February 4, 1994, a man was killed when a speeding truck rammed into his luna bike in Surat. A police chargesheet was filed against the truck driver, who was subsequently tried in a criminal court. The deceased was a bachelor with no wife or children, and his brothers were his only legal heirs. The brothers approached the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal seeking compensation. The tribunal partly allowed the claim and awarded Rs 2,02,000 along with 9 per cent interest. The truck owner and driver challenged the tribunal's award before the Gujarat high court. They argued that negligence on the part of the driver had not been proved and since the brothers lived separately and were not financially dependent on the deceased, they could not claim compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act.
What did the court say? The court rejected both arguments. On negligence, it noted that the truck driver himself had admitted in cross-examination that he had faced a criminal trial and had never complained to any authority that he had been falsely implicated. This, along with the evidence, was sufficient to uphold the tribunal's finding of negligence. On the more significant question of whether brothers can claim compensation, the court held that under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, any legal representative of the deceased is entitled to file a claim. The court noted that while the brothers had admitted in cross-examination that they lived separately and were not dependent on the deceased, that did not disqualify them from filing a claim. Relying on a series of Supreme Court rulings — including Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation v. Ramanbhai Prabhatbhai (1987), which had held that a brother is allowed to file petition if he is a legal representative of the deceased. The appeal filed by the truck owner and driver was dismissed, and they were directed to satisfy the tribunal's award within six weeks.
