The Bombay High Court recently ruled that the remarriage of a widow whose husband died in an accident is not sufficient grounds to deny her compensation claim under the Motor Vehicles Act.
The single-judge bench of Justice SG Dige observed that “at the time of the accident, she was legally wedded wife of deceased, which is a sufficient ground for entitlement to compensation”.
“After the death of a husband, remarriage cannot be taboo to get compensation. Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act provides that all or any legal representative of the deceased can file an application for compensation, and therefore the compensation application filed by the wife after the accident is legal,” the court said.
The bench was hearing an appeal filed by the Iffco Tokio General Insurance Company Ltd against the order passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Pune.
On May 15, 2010, Ganesh Gaikwad was travelling as a pillion rider on a motorcycle with Sakharam Gaikwad. They hit an autorickshaw, which was driving in a rash, negligent, and excessive manner. Both of them fell on the road and suffered numerous injuries. Ganesh suffered a brain injury and died during treatment. Thereafter, a case was registered against the driver of the auto-rickshaw.
At the time of the accident, the deceased’s wife was 19 years old and had filed a claim petition before the tribunal for compensation; during the pendency of the matter, she got married again.
The counsel appearing for the insurance company contended that it is not liable to pay the compensation because the rickshaw was outside the jurisdiction and also violated the terms and conditions of the permit. The permit was for Thane district only, but the accident took place on the Mumbai-Pune road.
It was further submitted that the deceased’s wife got remarried and, hence, she is not entitled to any compensation.
The counsel representing the claimants submitted that there is no evidence to prove that there was any kind of breach of the permit. Further, when Ganesh died, his wife was a widow, and after that, she filed the claim petition; therefore, remarriage cannot be grounds to deny compensation to her.
The court, after hearing the arguments submitted, held that the appellants had not examined any witness to prove that taking the offending rickshaw outside the jurisdiction of Thane district was a breach of the terms of the permit and, thus, there was no breach of the terms and conditions of the insurance policy.
It also directed that the claimants are entitled to Rs 80,000 as an additional amount (@ 7.5% per annum) from October 1, 2017, until realisation of the amount and asked the insurance company to deposit the amount within four weeks. Accordingly, the bench dismissed the appeal of the insurance company.
Read all the Latest India News here
Comments
0 comment