IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.514 of 1994 (O&M) Date of decision:10.02.2011 United India Insurance Company Limited ....Appellant versus Parminder Kaur and others ....Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN ---- Present: Mr. Raj Kumar Bashamboo, Advocate, for the appellant. Mr. P.K.Gupta, Advocate, for the respondents ---- 1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? No. 2. To be referred to the reporters or not ? Yes. 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest ? Yes. ---- K.Kannan, J. (Oral) 1. The appeal is by the insurer claiming that the driver did not have a driving licence. This aspect was not established at the trial and an application is filed at the appellate Court for the first time seeking for permission to file the documents or additional evidence seeking for proof. I will not accommodate the plea by reception of additional evidence when no justification is offered as to why it could not be filed before the Tribunal. 2. The other point, which is urged by the learned counsel, is that the daughter-in-law cannot make a claim for compensation for death of the mother-in-law. In this case, the son has also died and in such a FAO No.514 of 1994 (O&M) - 2 - situation, under Section 21(iv) of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, daughter-in-law is dependent. The claim is possible at the instance of a legal representative, who would be dependent and, therefore, no exception could be taken even as regards the maintainability of the petition. 3. The award is confirmed and the appeal is dismissed. (K.KANNAN) JUDGE 10.02.2011 sanjeev