Supreme Court of India· 13 May 2025

Under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, is a married daughter of the deceased entitled to loss of dependency compensation simply because she is a legal representative?

DEEP SHIKHA & ANR v. NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. & ORS.

2025 INSC 675
Coram: Sudhanshu Dhulia; K. Vinod Chandran

🔖 Save this judgment 🔔 Follow s.140 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 📬 Get today's judgments

View the original judgment PDFFree to read. To download it — or the LexStreak typeset copy with the headnote and Points of Law — create an account; downloads are part of the Pro plan.

Answer

No. A married daughter may be considered a legal representative, and her entitlement under Section 140 does not cease to exist in the absence of dependency. Loss of dependency is a different thing: Sections 166 and 168 focus on the financial relationship between the deceased and the claimant, so she must prove she was financially dependent on the deceased. Once a daughter is married the logical presumption is that she has rights in her matrimonial household and is financially supported by her husband or his family, so her dependence on her natal family has ceased unless proven otherwise.

Headnote

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — ss. 140, 166, 168 — Compensation — Loss of dependency — Legal representative — Married daughter — Dependent mother — Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — ss. 140, 166 — Married daughter — Legal representative without dependency — Held: A married daughter is a legal representative and keeps her Section 140 entitlement, which does not cease to exist in the absence of dependency, but she gets loss of dependency only on proving she was financially dependent on the deceased. (¶13, 14) Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — ss. 166, 168 — Dependent parent — Future dependency — Held further: A parent who lived with the deceased and had no independent income is a dependent; the obligation of a child to maintain a parent in old age matches the parent's duty during minority, and future dependency cannot be disregarded. (¶15, 16) Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — s.168 — Just compensation — Heads of award — Held further: A Tribunal that omits loss of future income and estate, funeral expenses and consortium has not applied the Pranay Sethi and Sarla Verma factors; compensation to the mother recomputed at Rs.19,22,356 and the appeals disposed of. (¶18, 19, 20)

In the Court's own words

Paragraph 13Once a daughter is married, logical presumption is that she now has rights on her matrimonial household and is also financially supported by her husband or his family, unless proven otherwise. It is more than likely that her dependence on her natal family, including her mother has now ceased. Sections 166 and 168 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 focus on the financial relationship between the deceased and the Claimant. A married daughter may be considered a legal representative, as per Manjuri Bera, but she will not be eligible for loss of dependency compensation unless it is proven by the daughter that she was financially dependent on the deceased. Thus, it is clear from the record that Appellant No. 1 has failed to prove that she was being financially supported by her mother post marriage and hence cannot be said to be a dependent of her mother, the deceased.

Paragraph 14Therefore, it is our opinion the High Court correctly relied on Manjuri Bera while holding that Appellant No.1, as the legal representative of the deceased, will only be entitled to compensation envisaged in Section 140 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 as liability under the same does not cease to exist in the absence of dependency.

Acts & Sections

s.140 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988s.166 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988s.168 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988

One judgment a day. That's the whole habit.

Read the full text of DEEP SHIKHA & ANR v. NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. & ORS. — and get the Supreme Court's output as a five-minute daily read, with plain-language headnotes and the questions each judgment settles.

Create my free account

Free forever plan · 30 seconds · data stays in India

Open the full judgment →

Also decided in this judgment

Under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, when is the mother of the deceased treated as a dependent for the purpose of compensation?What is the scope of Manjuri Bera v. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. in a motor accident claim under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988?Which heads must a Motor Accident Claims Tribunal take into account when computing compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988?

Plain-language answer prepared by the LexStreak Editorial Desk — verify against the judgment. Source: Supreme Court of India. Corrections