MV Act | Apportionment Of Compensation Not Guided by Personal Laws, Consideration Of Dependency On Deceased Paramount: J&K High Court

Justice M.A Chowdhary clarified that only if any Claimant dies before being awarded compensation of his share, the same may be released among his legal heirs as per applicable laws of inheritance.

These observations were made while hearing two connected appeals filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

The appeals arose from a common Award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Srinagar, in a case involving a traffic accident that resulted in the death of a Jammu Kashmir Administrative Services (KAS) officer Shabir Ahmad Wani, and his father Ghulam Hassan Wani.

The incident led to claim petitions being filed before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT) filed by the wife of Shabir as well as his mother and other siblings. The Tribunal subsequently passed an award whereby it granted Rs.57,05,650/- compensation to specific claimants while denying the same to others.

While Shabir's widow received 50% compensation, the remaining 50% was divided equally among the mother and three siblings.

Aggrieved by the award, the appellants contended that two of the claimants were wrongly denied compensation based on their employment status and age. Additionally, they argued that Shabir's widow was granted an excessive share of the compensation, contrary to the applicable personal law.

Overturning the decision of the Tribunal to deny compensation to two siblings of the deceased, the court held that legal heirs, whether married and earning, could claim compensation for the death of the deceased and that the Tribunal was duty bound to consider their claim, irrespective of their dependency on the deceased.

“The learned Tribunal, while deciding the case which is the subject matter of these Appeals, has taken an erroneous view while holding that the Claimants-Fehmeeda and Zaffar Ahmad, sister and brother of the deceased respectively, were not entitled to any compensation, being major and employed. Therefore, the Appeals, on this count that the Claimants, irrespective of their age and income or dependents, are entitled to compensation, being legal heirs, deserve to be accepted”, the bench recorded.

Justice Chowdhary also rejected the argument that personal law should guide the apportionment of compensation. The court emphasized that the apportionment must consider the loss of dependency and not be dictated by personal law.

“Court cannot be guided by personal law while deciding upon the apportionment of the compensation, which is to be paid taking into consideration the dependency of the claimants, the personal law is not applicable”, the court observed.

Highlighting the mandate of Section 168 of the MV Act, Justice Chowdhary held that the compensation awarded by MACT has to be paid to the Claimants, as considered to be appropriate to by the Tribunal given the loss of dependency, disregarding the inheritance as per personal law of the Claimants.

In light of these findings, the court modified the compensation amount and directed its distribution among the legal heirs, with 50% to the Appellant's mother and siblings of the deceased, and 50% to the wife of the deceased.

Case Title: Zareefa Banoo Vs Manzoor Ahmad Sheergujri

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 309

Click Here To Read/Download Judgment