In a significant ruling, the Kerala High Court has held that while a deceased’s married sister cannot claim compensation under the loss of dependency category, she is entitled to compensation for loss of estate if she is the sole legal heir. The judgment was delivered by Justice Shoba Annamma Eapen in The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Sindhu K. (MACA No. 532/2018).
Background of the Case
The case arose from a fatal accident that occurred on October 11, 2015, in Chandranagar, Palakkad. The deceased, Siju, was hit by a motorcycle (Reg. No. TN 40-B-9556) driven negligently by the second respondent. As a result of the impact, Siju suffered severe injuries and succumbed to them.
His sister, Sindhu K., filed a compensation claim before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-II, Palakkad (OP(MV) No. 653 of 2016), seeking ₹20,00,000. The tribunal found that the accident was caused due to the negligence of the motorcycle rider and awarded ₹9,50,000 as compensation under different heads, making the insurer, New India Assurance Co. Ltd., liable.
The insurance company challenged the tribunal’s decision before the High Court, arguing that the claimant was a married sister of the deceased and thus not financially dependent on him. They contended that she was not entitled to compensation under the loss of dependency head, citing the Supreme Court’s ruling in Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transport Corporation (2010).
Key Legal Issues Before the Court
1. Can a married sister of the deceased claim compensation under the head of loss of dependency?
2. If not, is she entitled to compensation under the head of loss of estate as the sole legal heir?
Court’s Observations and Ruling
After considering arguments from both sides, the Kerala High Court dismissed the insurer’s appeal and upheld the compensation, albeit under a different head.
1. Loss of Dependency Not Applicable:
– The court agreed with the insurer’s argument that since Sindhu was a married woman living with her husband, she was not financially dependent on the deceased at the time of his death.
– As per Sarla Verma (2010), compensation for loss of dependency is based on the number of dependents relying on the deceased’s income, which the claimant failed to prove.
2. Entitlement Under Loss of Estate:
– While rejecting the claim for loss of dependency, the court emphasized that as the sole legal heir, Sindhu was entitled to compensation under the head of loss of estate.
– The court relied on its previous rulings in Joseph v. Giji Varghese (2009 KHC 1076) and Elamma v. ICICI Lombard (2023), which recognized the right of siblings to claim loss of estate even if they were not dependents.
– Following the Supreme Court’s decision in Pranay Sethi (2017), the court calculated compensation by deducting 50% of the deceased’s income as personal expenses instead of 66%, which was done in previous cases.
3. Additional Compensation for Loss of Love and Affection:
– The court noted that the tribunal had not awarded any compensation for loss of love and affection.
– It granted an additional ₹40,000 under this head, payable by the insurer with 8% interest per annum from the date of the claim until realization.
Final Decision
The Kerala High Court dismissed the insurer’s appeal and awarded an additional ₹40,000 to the claimant over and above the original compensation. The insurer was directed to deposit the amount within two months, failing which it would have to be deposited before the tribunal.
