Re-Marriage Of Widow Is Personal Choice, Not Ground To Deny Compensation Under Motor Vehicle Act: Punjab & Haryana High Court

Observing that "re-marriage of widow is a personal choice" and nobody can have a say in it, the Punjab & Haryana High Court has made it clear that re-marriage of a widow would not disentitle her from compensation upon death of her husband under Motor Vehicle Act.

Justice Archana Puri said,

"it is to be noticed that simply because Rajni, widow of the deceased, got re-married, it could not be a reason to deprive of her rightly claim. Re-marriage of widow has nothing to do with her right, which accrued to her to seek compensation, on account of loss, which has accrued to her, as a result of unnatural demise of her husband. Her decision to re-marry is entirely her personal choice and nobody can have say in the same."

Reliance was place upon Dincy Devassy vs. United India Insurance Company and others (2019) in which the Delhi High Court concluded that right of the widow to claim compensation crystallizes upon her husband’s life, being tragically snatched away in the motor accident. Therefore, simply because she has now re-married, her claim does not abate or lessen.

These observations came in response to the pleas filed by Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd. and parents of the deceased who died in motor accident challenging the Award of the compensation granted by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal.

It was contended that the widow of the deceased, Rajni, would not be entitled to compensation because she has remarried.

However, the Court rejected the contention and reference was made to Gianis W/o. Late Anil Abraham vs. Lazar Manjila S/o. Joy Manjila, (2020) where Kerala High Court held that the appellant would not have thought of a remarriage, but for the untimely death of her husband.

Justice Puri opined that in the light of the aforesaid case law, even though, widow Rajni had re-married, after a period of three years, but still, she is entitled to compensation. 

Adding that though, the fact of her re-marriage, may as such, taken into consideration for working upon the extent of compensation, the Court said, "however, the compensation, in toto, as such, cannot be denied."

Dependency Does Not Only Mean Being Financial Dependent

The Court also rejected the contention that the father of the deceased would not be entitled to compensation because he is having two other sons and also 3 acres of land and himself being a pensioner, on account of being Ex- serviceman.

 "He may not be financially dependent upon the deceased, but however, it should be noted that the word 'dependent' has a different meaning in different connotation," said the Court.

It further said that some may be dependent in terms of money and others may be dependent in terms of service. Thus, dependency is a relevant criteria to claim compensation for loss of dependency. "Dependency not necessarily means financial only, it also includes gratuitous service dependency, physical dependency, emotional dependency, psychological dependency, and so on and so forth, which can never be equated in terms of money."

Hence, Justice Puri concluded that even though deceased may not be rendering financial assistance to his father, but however, emotional and psychological dependency upon the deceased, by his father, as such, ought to be there and considering the same, father also ought to be paid the compensation.

"The emotional dependency of the parents of a young son, who has died, as such, cannot be overlooked and therefore, Suraj Bhan, father of the deceased is also entitled to compensation," added the bench.

After examining the grounds, the Court modified the award and by enhancing compensation, after the deduction of compensation awarded by the Tribunal came to be Rs.28,88,988- 18,19,992=Rs.10,68,996/-.

Consequently, the Court decided that on the enhanced amount of the compensation i.e. Rs.10,68,996/-, the appellants-claimants i.e. parents of deceased Jogender and respondent-Rajni, widow of deceased shall be entitled to the interest, at the rate of 6% per annum, from the date of filing of the present appeal, till realization of the enhanced amount of compensation

The bench further opined that the enhanced amount be allowed to be withdrawn by Rajni, at the relevant time, upon filing of an affidavit-cum-declaration before the Executing Court, thereby, giving the detail of the amount received by her towards financial assistance.

It also directed the Executing Court to make relevant deductions if any financial assistance has already been received by the widow of father of the deceased.

Appearance: Sanjeev Kodan, Advocate, for the appellant (in FAO-2917-2014) and for respondent No.3 (in FAO-8330-2014).