The Kerala High Court has ruled that the father and younger siblings of a deceased individual are entitled to compensation under the category of loss of dependency. The court emphasized that dependency is not restricted to financial dependency alone.
The case involved a 26-year-old man who tragically lost his life in a motor vehicle accident. While upholding the compensation awarded by the Tribunal, Justice Jobin Sebastian stated that dependency extends beyond financial aspects to include emotional and physical support.
Court’s Observations on Dependency
The High Court rejected the argument that the deceased’s father, who was only 50 years old, was not dependent on his major son. The court stated:
"At such an advanced age, a person would naturally look forward to his son for support, care, and future well-being. Consequently, the loss of a major son would significantly impact his expectations, emotional stability, and overall quality of life. Obviously, a father will share the responsibilities with his major son. Furthermore, dependency does not necessarily mean only financial dependency. Therefore, merely because the father of the deceased was aged only 50 years, it could not be said that the father is not a dependent."
The court further emphasized that the younger siblings of the deceased would also have relied on him for emotional and physical support.
"Evidently, both of them were unmarried and residing under the same roof with their deceased brother and parents. As I have already stated, dependency does not mean financial dependency only. The emotional and physical support that would have been rendered by the deceased to his siblings if he had been alive persuades me to treat the unmarried and younger siblings of the deceased as his dependents. Moreover, there is no evidence to show that any of the siblings were earning members or capable of maintaining themselves."
Details of the Case
The deceased was traveling in a car driven in a rash and negligent manner, resulting in an accident. The Tribunal determined that the accident was caused by the driver’s reckless driving and awarded a compensation of ₹17,67,700 to the family members.
Dissatisfied with the amount, the claimants—including the wife, father, mother, and two younger siblings of the deceased—appealed for an enhanced compensation, arguing that the sum awarded was insufficient to compensate for their loss.
The High Court noted that the Tribunal had assessed the deceased’s monthly income as ₹7,000 under the category of loss of dependency. However, considering that the accident took place in 2015 and the deceased was employed at a mobile repair shop, the court referenced precedents, including Ramachandrappa v. Manager, Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Company Ltd. (2011) and National Insurance Company Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi, to revise the monthly income to ₹14,000.
Furthermore, the court ruled that compensation for loss of consortium should also be awarded to the deceased’s parents, not just the wife.
"The tribunal omitted to award compensation under the head of loss of consortium in favor of the 2nd and 3rd petitioners irrespective of the fact that they are the parents of the deceased. Their close relationship and bondage with the deceased would certainly entitle them to get compensation under the head of loss of consortium as well."
Additionally, the court recognized that the younger siblings of the deceased were entitled to compensation under the category of love and affection.
Read also: Kerala HC Questions Police Power Under S.35(3) BNSS: Sub-Inspector Reprimanded for Summoning Lawyer
After reviewing the appeal, the Kerala High Court ruled in favor of the claimants and enhanced the compensation by ₹7,22,600, raising the total amount from ₹17,67,700.
Counsel for Claimants: Advocates K V Reshmi, J Deepthi
Counsel for Insurance Company: Advocate Lal K Joseph
Case Title: Chaithanya v The New India General Ins.Co.Ltd.
Case No: MACA NO. 2151 OF 2018
