'Married daughter is not eligible for' dependent compensation 'until ...', the Supreme Court said - they are their responsibility - the Supreme Court on Motor Vehicle Act is married to girls right to compensation

The Supreme Court said in an important decision on the Motor Vehicles Act that married daughter could not get compensation before she proved that she was dependent on the deceased financially. The court approved the remuneration of the old mother and raised it to Rs 1922356. The court said it is the duty of children to care for old parents. Mala Dixit, Jagran, New -Delhi. The Supreme Court, in an important decision on the right to get compensation dependent in the Motor Vehicles Act that the married daughter is not eligible to get compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act until she proves that she was dependent on the dead financially. However, the court acknowledged that a married daughter could be considered a legal representative. In addition, the court maintained the High Court’s decision to reduce the remuneration of the married daughter to Rs 50000 and did not depend on the mother’s death in the accident. However, the Supreme Court canceled the Supreme Court order to dismiss the old mother’s remuneration of the old mother and ordered the mother to compensate. What did the Supreme Court say about the care of parents? The Supreme Court said about taking care of the parents that the care of the old parents is the same duty to the children, as it is the parents’ responsibility to care for the minors. The Supreme Court not only accepted the claim of the old mother, but also increased the total compensation by 15,97,000 to Rs 19,22,356. In this case, 55 -year -old woman Paras Sharma died in a road accident on January 26, 2008. Both her married daughter and an old mother who live with both have filed a compensation claim. This ruling in the Supreme Court is this decision Sudhanshu Dhulia and Justice KK The Bank of Vinod Chandran will be pronounced on May 13. In this case, the married daughter and old mother disputed the order of the Rajasthan High Court of May 14, 2018. The Supreme Court reduced the remuneration of the married daughter, while the old mother’s compensation was rejected. Before the Supreme Court, the car accident tribunal ordered a total compensation of Rs 15,97,000, which accepted the compensation claims of the two. The tribunal acknowledged that both the deceased had women legitimate heirs and depended somewhat on her. The tribunal considered 50 percent of transport. The legal question for consideration before the Supreme Court was whether the file (both) earned compensation by the tribunal, as the two were eligible for compensation as they claimed to be dependent on the deceased. Where is the daughter’s right in the property of In -laws and Maiden? In this case, Paras Sharma, who lost his life in the accident, was married, but her husband only left her after the birth of a daughter (first plaintiff). Then his mother (second plaintiff) came and stayed with him. The Supreme Court said in the ruling that once the daughter gets married, the general estimate is that she now has authority over her in -laws and is now financially dependent on her husband or on her husband’s family until she is effective. The Supreme Court said most of it is understood that the dependence on her mother or mother has ended. The Supreme Court said that the economic ratio of the deceased and the plaintiff in section 166 and 168 of the Motor Vehicles Act 1988 was focused. The court said that the married daughter approves the Bera ruling (prior sentence) can be considered a legal representative, but that she would not be eligible for dependent compensation before proving that she was dependent on the dead financially. The bank said it was clear from the record that the daughter could not prove that she had received financial support from her mother after marriage. Therefore, she cannot be mentioned dependent on the mother. Compensation under Article 140 said the Supreme Court that the Supreme Court’s approval in such a situation is good to give compensation under section 140, if the daughter is regarded as the legal representative of the deceased on the basis of Bera’s ruling. The Supreme Court said that even if it is not dependent, the rights in this section do not end. But with the decision of the Supreme Court to dismiss the mother’s claim, the Supreme Court said that when Paras Sharma died, her mother was 70 years old and that she was completely dependent on the daughter and lived with her, she had no separate income. No evidence that opposes it is on record. The court said that the care of the parents at age is the same duty as the parents’ responsibility to take care of the child if he is a minor. The court said that the mother was dependent and that the untimely death of the daughter could cause problems before her. The claim of the mother differs from the claim of the married daughter. After this, the Supreme Court again calculated the compensation and increased the compensation amount with Rs 19,22,356 and the mother ordered to pay Rs 19,22,356. Also read: How Saifullah Khalid was killed in Pakistan? Every latest news and accurate information about the country and the world were involved in these incidents in India, every moment on your phone! Download now- Jagran app