Fathers and mothers are equally entitled to motor accident compensation for the death of an unmarried child.

On December 31, 2020, Shalu Baby (18 years old) died in a motor accident when a dumper (MP 65 H 3695) driven negligently collided with the motorcycle on which she was a pillion rider.

The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT), Mandla, awarded Rs. 9,01,600/- as compensation, apportioning 25% to the mother (Gauri Padwar) and 75% to the father (Ram Das Dharve).

The mother appealed for enhancement and challenged the apportionment (M.A. 1193/2023).

The father filed a separate appeal with a 362-day delay, seeking further enhancement and a reduction in the mother’s share.

1. Whether the father’s appeal (M.A. No. 3237/2024) is barred by limitation due to lack of sufficient cause for a 362-day delay.

2. Whether the Tribunal erred in assessing the deceased’s notional income at Rs. 5,500/- per month and in the distribution of the award between the parents.

The Court applied Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, emphasizing that "delay defeats equity" and "the Courts help those who are vigilant," citing Pundlik Jalam Patil v. Executive Engineer, Jalgaon Medium Project [(2008) 17 SCC 448] and Majji Sannemma @ Sanyasirao v. Reddy Sridevi [AIR 2022 SC 332] regarding the requirement of a "sufficient cause" for condonation.

For compensation calculation, the Court followed the guidelines in National Insurance Company Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi & Others [(2017) 16 SCC 680] regarding future prospects and Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transport Corporation [(2009) 6 SCC 121] for standard deductions and multipliers.

Regarding M.A. 3237/2024, the Court found the father’s explanation—that his lawyer did not inform him of the award—vague and "sketchy". Since his wife had filed a timely appeal, his claim of ignorance was deemed non-credible, and a delay of 362 days was not condoned.

Regarding M.A. 1193/2023, the Court determined the Tribunal undervalued the deceased's monthly income, increasing it from Rs. 5,500/- to Rs. 8,000/- to align with minimum wage standards. The Court applied a 40% addition for future prospects, a 1/2 deduction for personal expenses (as she was unmarried), and a multiplier of 18.

Crucially, the Court corrected the "erroneous" apportionment, ruling that both parents are equally entitled to the compensation regardless of their personal disputes.

The Court allowed M.A. No. 1193/2023, enhancing the total compensation to Rs. 12,51,600/- (an increase of Rs. 3,50,000/- over the Tribunal's award) and ordered the total amount to be distributed equally (50% each) between the mother and the father.

The Insurance Company was directed to deposit the enhanced amount within 60 days with interest from the date of the appeal's filing (27.02.2023).