'Dependent' Mother In Law Of A Deceased Can Maintain Motor Accident Claim Petition: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court observed that a motor accident claim petition filed by mother in law who was dependent on her deceased son in law is maintainable.

"It is not uncommon in Indian Society for the mother­-in­-law to live with her daughter and son-­in­-law during her old age and be dependent upon her son-­in-­law for her maintenance", the bench of Justices S. Abdul Nazeer and Krishna Murari observed while holding that she is a "legal representative" under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act.

In this case, the High Court of Kerala had held that mother in law of the deceased is not a legal representative under Section 166 of MV Act and thus not entitled to maintain the claim petition.

In appeal, it was contended that she was living with the deceased and his family members and thus she was entitled to be treated as a legal representative for the purpose of determination of compensation. One of the issues was whether the High Court was justified in precluding the mother­in­law of the deceased as his legal representative?

A legal heir may also be a legal representative

Answering this issue, the court noted that the MV Act does not define the term 'legal representative'.

"Generally, 'legal representative' means a person who in law represents the estate of the deceased person and includes any person or persons in whom legal right to receive compensatory benefit vests. A 'legal representative' may also include any person who intermeddles with the estate of the deceased. Such person does not necessarily have to be a legal heir. Legal heirs are the persons who are entitled to inherit the surviving estate of the deceased. A legal heir may also be a legal representative."

Term 'legal representative' should be given a wider interpretation 

The court also noted that the Kerala Motor Vehicle Rules, 1989, defines the term 'legal representative' as "a person who in law is entitled to inherit the estate of the deceased if he had left any estate at the time of his death and also includes any legal heir of the deceased and the executor or administrator of the estate of the deceased." The court observed:

16. In our view, the term 'legal representative' should be given a wider interpretation for the purpose of Chapter XII of MV Act and it should not be confined only to mean the spouse, parents and children of the deceased. As noticed above, MV Act is a benevolent legislation enacted for the object of providing monetary relief to the  victims or their families. Therefore, the MV Act calls for a liberal and wider interpretation to serve the real purpose underlying the enactment and fulfil its legislative intent. We are also of the view that in order to maintain a claim petition, it is sufficient for the claimant to establish his loss of dependency. Section 166 of the MV Act makes it clear that every legal representative who suffers on account of the death of a person in a motor vehicle accident should have a remedy for realization of compensation

Referring to earlier judgments in Hafizun Begum (Mrs) vs. Mohd. Ikram Heque (2007) 10 SCC 715 and Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation, Ahmedabad vs. Ramanbhai Prabhatbhai (1987) 3 SCC 234 and Montford Brothers of St. Gabriel and Anr. vs. United India Insurance (2014) 3 SCC 394, the court observed thus:

21. Coming to the facts of the present case, the fourth appellant was the mother ­in­ law of the deceased. Materials on record clearly establish that she was residing with the deceased and his family members. She was dependent on him for her shelter and maintenance. It is not uncommon in Indian Society for the mother­in­law to live with her daughter and son ­in ­law during her old age and be dependent upon her son­ in­ law for her maintenance. Appellant no.4 herein may not be a legal heir of the deceased, but she certainly suffered on account of his death. Therefore, we have no hesitation to hold that she is a "legal representative" under Section 166 of the MV Act and is entitled to maintain a claim petition.

Observing thus, the bench allowed the appeal.

Case name and Citation:  N. Jayasree vs. Cholamandalam Ms General Insurance Company Ltd. | LL 2021 SC 588

Case no. and Date:  CA 6451 OF 2021 | 25 October 2021 

Click here to Read/Download Judgment