The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd v. Manmohan Sharda & Ors.

Judgment

1. Insurance The present appeal has been filed by the appellant–Insurance The present appeal has been filed by the appellant The present appeal has been filed by the appellant Company seeking to set aside the Award dated 18.10.2025 passed by the learned Company seeking to set aside the Award dated 18.10.2025 passed by the learned Company seeking to set aside the Award dated 18.10.2025 passed by the learned Company seeking to set aside the Award dated 18.10.2025 passed by the learned ur (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Hoshiarpur (hereinafter referred to as ‘the ur (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Hoshiarp learned Tribunal’) whereby the claim petition filed by respondents No. 1, 2 and 3- learned Tribunal’) whereby the claim petition filed by respondents No. 1, 2 and 3 learned Tribunal’) whereby the claim petition filed by respondents No. 1, 2 and 3 learned Tribunal’) whereby the claim petition filed by respondents No. 1, 2 and 3 claimants on account of the death of Usha Sharda, wife of respondent No.1 in a claimants on account of the death of Usha Sharda, wife of respondent No.1 in a claimants on account of the death of Usha Sharda, wife of respondent No.1 in a claimants on account of the death of Usha Sharda, wife of respondent No.1 in a motor vehicular accident on 18.05.2024, has been allowed. motor vehicular accident on 18.05.2024, has been allowed. motor vehicular accident on 18.05.2024, has been allowed.

2. Insurance Company contends that Learned counsel for the appellant–Insurance Company contends that Learned counsel for the appellant Learned counsel for the appellant the learned Tribunal has erred in law and on facts while passing the impugned the learned Tribunal has erred in law and on facts while passing the impugned the learned Tribunal has erred in law and on facts while passing the impugned the learned Tribunal has erred in law and on facts while passing the impugned award dated 18.10.2025, awarding an excessive compensation of Rs.16,90,200/- award dated 18.10.2025, awarding an excessive compensation of Rs.16,90,200/ award dated 18.10.2025, awarding an excessive compensation of Rs.16,90,200/ award dated 18.10.2025, awarding an excessive compensation of Rs.16,90,200/ the monthly income of the deceased has been with interest @ 7% per annum, as the monthly income of the deceased has been the monthly income of the deceased has been with interest @ 7% per annum, as -1- FAO-2032-2026 2026 (O&M) without considering the inconsistent salary arbitrarily assessed at Rs.12,250/- without considering the inconsistent salary without considering the inconsistent salary arbitrarily assessed at Rs.12,250/ reflected in the record and ought to have been taken on an average basis. Further, reflected in the record and ought to have been taken on an average basis. Further, reflected in the record and ought to have been taken on an average basis. Further, reflected in the record and ought to have been taken on an average basis. Further, come parameters and ignored the the learned Tribunal has wrongly adopted dual income parameters and ignored the the learned Tribunal has wrongly adopted dual in the learned Tribunal has wrongly adopted dual in deposition relevant documents indicating lower earnings. Furthermore, the grant of deposition relevant documents indicating lower earnings. Furthermore, the grant of deposition relevant documents indicating lower earnings. Furthermore, the grant of deposition relevant documents indicating lower earnings. Furthermore, the grant of towards household services is legally unsustainable as the deceased Rs.5,40,000/- towards household services is legally unsustainable as the deceased towards household services is legally unsustainable as the deceased towards household services is legally unsustainable as the deceased le dual compensation. time salaried employee, resulting in impermissible dual compensation. time salaried employee, resulting in impermissib was a full-time salaried employee, resulting in impermissib Subsequently, it is contended that the learned Tribunal has erred in treating all Subsequently, it is contended that the learned Tribunal has erred in treating all Subsequently, it is contended that the learned Tribunal has erred in treating all Subsequently, it is contended that the learned Tribunal has erred in treating all claimants as dependents, including the married daughter living separately, and claimants as dependents, including the married daughter living separately, and claimants as dependents, including the married daughter living separately, and claimants as dependents, including the married daughter living separately, and despite clear evidence that the husband and major son were financially despite clear evidence that the husband and major son were financially despite clear evidence that the husband and major son were financially despite clear evidence that the husband and major son were financially dependent, has wrongly applied deduction of 1/3rd and multiplier method. independent, has wrongly applied deduction of 1/3rd and multiplier method. dependent, has wrongly applied deduction of 1/3rd and multiplier method. dependent, has wrongly applied deduction of 1/3rd and multiplier method. Consequently, the entire assessment is stated to be based on conjectures and Consequently, the entire assessment is stated to be based on conjectures and Consequently, the entire assessment is stated to be based on conjectures and Consequently, the entire assessment is stated to be based on conjectures and surmises, without proper deductions towards personal expenses, rendering the surmises, without proper deductions towards personal expenses, rendering the surmises, without proper deductions towards personal expenses, rendering the surmises, without proper deductions towards personal expenses, rendering the impugned award excessive and liable to be modified/reduced. impugned award excessive and Reliance has been liable to be modified/reduced. Reliance has been Sushila and Others v. Sudhakar and Another Civil Appeal No.4213 of placed on Sushila and Others v. Sudhakar and Another Civil Appeal No.4213 of Sushila and Others v. Sudhakar and Another Civil Appeal No.4213 of Sushila and Others v. Sudhakar and Another Civil Appeal No.4213 of

3. Per contra, learned counsel for respondent Nos.1, 2 and 3 Per contra claimants , learned counsel for respondent Nos.1, 2 and 3-claimants submits that the award passed by the learned Tribunal does not suffer from any submits that the award passed by the learned Tribunal does not suffer from any submits that the award passed by the learned Tribunal does not suffer from any submits that the award passed by the learned Tribunal does not suffer from any

reasoned on irregularity or infirmity, and that the findings recorded therein are well-reasoned on irregularity or infirmity, and that the findings recorded therein are well irregularity or infirmity, and that the findings recorded therein are well ble before the learned Tribunal. It is accordingly the basis of the material available before the learned Tribunal. It is accordingly ble before the learned Tribunal. It is accordingly the basis of the material availa contended that no ground is made out for interference in appeals. Reliance has been contended that no ground is made out for interference in appeals. Reliance has been contended that no ground is made out for interference in appeals. Reliance has been contended that no ground is made out for interference in appeals. Reliance has been Laxmidhar Nayak and others v. Jugal Kishore Behera and Others placed on Laxmidhar Nayak and others v. Jugal Kishore Behera and Others Laxmidhar Nayak and others v. Jugal Kishore Behera and Others Laxmidhar Nayak and others v. Jugal Kishore Behera and Others 2018 2018 (1) SC (1) SC 746 746 Sunita and Sunita Sunita v. Vinod Singh v. Vinod Singh v. Vinod Singh and Others and Oth and Oth 2025 INSC 366 2025 INSC 366

4. ve heard learned counsel for the parties and examined the record, I have heard learned counsel for the parties and examined the record, ve heard learned counsel for the parties and examined the record, I ha with their able assistance. with their able assistance. -2- FAO-2032-2026 2026 (O&M)

5. In view of the rival submissions, the following issues arise for In view of the rival submissions, the following issues arise for In view of the rival submissions, the following issues arise for consideration before this Court: consideration before this Court: vices, in addition to whether the grant of compensation towards household services, in addition to whether the grant of compensation towards household ser (i) whether the grant of compensation towards household ser the income of the deceased, amounts to impermissible double compensation; and the income of the deceased, amounts to impermissible double compensation; and the income of the deceased, amounts to impermissible double compensation; and the income of the deceased, amounts to impermissible double compensation; and (ii) whether the claimants, namely the husband, a major earning son, and a (ii) whether the claimants, namely the husband, a major earning son, and a (ii) whether the claimants, namely the husband, a major earning son, and a (ii) whether the claimants, namely the husband, a major earning son, and a married daughter, could be treated as dependents for the purpose of computation married daughter, could be treated as dependents for the purpose of computation married daughter, could be treated as dependents for the purpose of computation married daughter, could be treated as dependents for the purpose of computation f compensation. of compensation.

6. Insurance Company that the grant of The contention of the appellant–Insurance Company that the grant of Insurance Company that the grant of The contention of the appellant compensation towards household services, in addition to the income of the compensation towards household services, in addition to the income of the compensation towards household services, in addition to the income of the compensation towards household services, in addition to the income of the deceased, amounts to impermissible double compensation, does not merit deceased, amounts to impermissible double compensation, does not merit deceased, amounts to impermissible double compensation, does not merit deceased, amounts to impermissible double compensation, does not merit of “household services” is not confined merely to cases acceptance. The concept of “household services” is not confined merely to cases of “household services” is not confined merely to cases acceptance. The concept earning housewife; rather, it encompasses the where the deceased is a non-earning housewife; rather, it encompasses the earning housewife; rather, it encompasses the where the deceased is a non multifaceted contribution made by an individual towards the family unit, which multifaceted contribution made by an individual towards the family unit, which multifaceted contribution made by an individual towards the family unit, which multifaceted contribution made by an individual towards the family unit, which a working woman, despite being remains uncompensated in monetary terms. Even a working woman, despite being remains uncompensated in monetary terms. Even remains uncompensated in monetary terms. Even gainfully employed, contributes substantially in terms of domestic management, gainfully employed, contributes substantially in terms of domestic management, gainfully employed, contributes substantially in terms of domestic management, gainfully employed, contributes substantially in terms of domestic management, care, emotional support and other intangible services, the loss of which cannot be care, emotional support and other intangible services, the loss of which cannot be care, emotional support and other intangible services, the loss of which cannot be care, emotional support and other intangible services, the loss of which cannot be , therefore, cannot ignored while assessing just compensation. The learned Tribunal, therefore, cannot ignored while assessing just compensation. The learned Tribunal ignored while assessing just compensation. The learned Tribunal be said to have committed any illegality in awarding a reasonable amount under be said to have committed any illegality in awarding a reasonable amount under be said to have committed any illegality in awarding a reasonable amount under be said to have committed any illegality in awarding a reasonable amount under this head, as the same is in consonance with the principle of awarding “just and fair this head, as the same is in consonance with the principle of awarding “just and fair this head, as the same is in consonance with the principle of awarding “just and fair this head, as the same is in consonance with the principle of awarding “just and fair compensation” under the Motor Vehicles Act. The grant of compensation f compensation” under the Motor Vehicles Act. T compensation” under the Motor Vehicles Act. T he grant of compensation for household services in addition to income does not amount to impermissible double household services in addition to income does not amount to impermissible double household services in addition to income does not amount to impermissible double household services in addition to income does not amount to impermissible double compensation compensation compensation compensation instead, instead, instead, instead, it acknowledges it acknowledges it acknowledges it acknowledges the multifaceted contributions of the multifaceted contributions of the multifaceted contributions of the multifaceted contributions of pecuniary services. individuals to their families, both in terms of income and non-pecuniary services. individuals to their families, both in terms of income and non individuals to their families, both in terms of income and non Reliance can be placed on judgment rendered by Hon’ble Supreme Court in Reliance can be p Arun laced on judgment rendered by Hon’ble Supreme Court in Arun -3- FAO-2032-2026 2026 (O&M) Kumar Agrawal and Another v. National Insurance Company and Others, AIR Kumar Agrawal and Another v. National Insurance Company and Others, AIR Kumar Agrawal and Another v. National Insurance Company and Others, AIR Kumar Agrawal and Another v. National Insurance Company and Others, AIR 2010 SC 3426.

7. Equally untenable is the argument raised by the appellant with regard Equally untenable is the argument raised by the appellant with regard Equally untenable is the argument raised by the appellant with regard Equally untenable is the argument raised by the appellant with regard to absence of dependency on the part of the claimants. It is well settled that the to absence of dependency on the part of the claimants. It is well settled that the to absence of dependency on the part of the claimants. It is well settled that the to absence of dependency on the part of the claimants. It is well settled that the concept of “dependency” under the Motor Vehicles Act is not to be construed in a concept of “dependency” under the Motor Vehicles Act is not to be construed in a concept of “dependency” under the Motor Vehicles Act is not to be construed in a concept of “dependency” under the Motor Vehicles Act is not to be construed in a ner confined strictly to financial dependency alone. A son, narrow or pedantic manner confined strictly to financial dependency alone. A son, ner confined strictly to financial dependency alone. A son, narrow or pedantic man even if earning, does not cease to be a dependent in the broader sense, particularly even if earning, does not cease to be a dependent in the broader sense, particularly even if earning, does not cease to be a dependent in the broader sense, particularly even if earning, does not cease to be a dependent in the broader sense, particularly economic context where familial bonds and mutual support in the Indian socio-economic context where familial bonds and mutual support economic context where familial bonds and mutual support in the Indian socio ncial calculations. Similarly, a married daughter systems operate beyond strict financial calculations. Similarly, a married daughter ncial calculations. Similarly, a married daughter systems operate beyond strict fina cannot be excluded from the ambit of compensation solely on the ground of her cannot be excluded from the ambit of compensation solely on the ground of her cannot be excluded from the ambit of compensation solely on the ground of her cannot be excluded from the ambit of compensation solely on the ground of her marital status or separate residence. The law has consistently evolved to recognize marital status or separate residence. The law has consistently evolved to recognize marital status or separate residence. The law has consistently evolved to recognize marital status or separate residence. The law has consistently evolved to recognize especially under conventional heads, the right of such claimants to compensation, especially under conventional heads, especially under conventional heads, the right of such claimants to compensation, acknowledging the loss of parental care, guidance and affection. The learned acknowledging the loss of parental care, guidance and affection. The learned acknowledging the loss of parental care, guidance and affection. The learned acknowledging the loss of parental care, guidance and affection. The learned Tribunal has, thus, rightly treated the claimants as dependents for the purpose of Tribunal has, thus, rightly treated the claimants as dependents for the purpose of Tribunal has, thus, rightly treated the claimants as dependents for the purpose of Tribunal has, thus, rightly treated the claimants as dependents for the purpose of ence. Reliance can be computation and has committed no error warranting interference. Reliance can be computation and has committed no error warranting interfer computation and has committed no error warranting interfer National Insurance Company Limited v. Birender and Ors reported as placed on National Insurance Company Limited v. Birender and Ors reported as National Insurance Company Limited v. Birender and Ors reported as National Insurance Company Limited v. Birender and Ors reported as