Major sons and married daughters are entitled to loss-of-dependency compensation as legal representatives.

On 17 April 2017, Kashappa died from injuries sustained while travelling as a passenger in a Maxi Cab.

His wife, two adult sons and married daughter sought compensation.

The Tribunal awarded them Rs. 4,17,896 and fastened liability on the insurer.

The insurer appealed, principally contending that the adult sons and married daughter were not dependent on the deceased and should not receive compensation for loss of dependency.

Whether the insurer established that the Tribunal’s compensation award was illegal, particularly its treatment of the deceased’s adult sons and married daughter as dependants.

What order should follow.

The appeal was brought under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

On dependency, the Court relied on Seema Rani & Others v. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. & Others, 2025 SCC OnLine SC 283, and stated that married daughters and major sons, as legal representatives of the deceased, are considered dependants and may claim compensation for loss of dependency.

The Court noted that the relationship of the claimants to the deceased was undisputed: the first claimant was his wife, the second and third claimants were his adult sons, and the fourth claimant was his married daughter. Applying Seema Rani, it rejected the insurer’s contention that the adult children were not dependants and held that they were entitled to compensation for loss of dependency.

It also reviewed the award under the other heads and found no basis to interfere with it.

It directed that any amount deposited be transmitted to the Tribunal and that the trial court records be sent back; pending applications were disposed of.