The instant miscellaneous appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, has been preferred by the appellant-Insurance Company being aggrieved with the award dated 10.02.2023 passed by the Third Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jabalpur, in MACC No.3990/2020 whereby the learned claims Tribunal awarded a compensation to the tune of Rs,18,14,440/- in favour of the claimants- respondents No.1 and 2.

2. The concise account of the case are that on 01.10.2020 in the evening, Sevanti Jatav (deceased) along with her husband and son, was going to her maternal home by their motorcycle, on the way, respondent No.3 while driving the motorcycle bearing registration No.MP-49-MD-8909, dashed the motorcycle of deceased recklessly which resulted into grievous injuries to the deceased on her head, right hand and other different body Signature Not Verified Signed by: PRACHI PANDEY Signing time: 06-10-2025 17:38:59 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:47597 2 MA-3764-2023 parts. The deceased was immediately took to the hospital, subsequently referred to higher medical centre at Jabalpur, where she was declared to be died. The information regarding death of deceased was sent to Police Station- Suatala, District- Narsinghpur, where the offence under the provisions of Indian Penal Code was registered against respondent No.3.

3. It is undisputed that the vehicle was registered in the name of respondent No.3 and driven by himself and insured with the appellant- Insurance Company. The deceased was a housewife having responsibilities of taking care of her family members. The claimants have filed a claim petition before the Motor Accident Tribunal, Jabalpur, despite being residents of District- Narsinghpur. After dealing with the question of territorial jurisdiction as well as considering the evidence adduced by the parties, learned Tribunal has passed the award impugned which is being assailed in this appeal.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant- Insurance Company has argued that the claimants are residents of District- Narsinghpur, the incident was occurred there only, report was lodged at Police Station- Suatala, which is also situated in the said district and the insurance policy was never issued by the Branch situated at Jabalpur, therefore, the learned Tribunal, Jabalpur, had no jurisdiction to hear the claim case, despite that, the award has been passed by the Tribunal ignoring the objection raised by the Insurance Company, and thus, only on the sole ground of territorial jurisdiction, the award passed by learned Tribunal deserves to be set-aside. He has further argued that so far as merits of the matter is concerned, there is unexplained delay of 33 days in Signature Not Verified Signed by: PRACHI PANDEY Signing time: 06-10-2025 17:38:59 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:47597 3 MA-3764-2023 lodging the FIR. In the clami petition, the claimants have stated that the offending vehicle was involved in the accident whereas the information given to Police Station- Kareli, by the Community Centre- Kareli, it was mentioned that the deceased has fallen down from their own motorcycle, therefore, it is a case of vehicle implantation. He has further submitted that on the date of accident, the husband of deceased did not have valid and effective driving license and enjoying tripling ride which is prohibited by law. At any eventuality, if it is assumed that the appellant- Insurance Company is liable to pay the compensation being insurer of offending vehicle, it is a case of contributory negligence on the part of deceased and her husband i.e. respondent No.1. The respondent No.1 cannot be said to be a dependent of the deceased and thus, the Tribunal erred in considering him as dependent and awarding compensation accordingly.

5. Learned counsel for the respondents/claimants has supported the impugned award submitting that the learned Tribunal has rightly awarded the compensation to the claimants. On the point of lack of territorial jurisdiction of the learned claims Tribunal, Jabalpur, learned counsel has argued that it has been established by the Court of law that the claim can be filed anywhere, if the Branch office of insurer is situated and has business there. In response to the arguments challenging dependency of respondent No.1 being husband of deceased, learned counsel for the respondents has relied upon the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sri Malakappa & Ors. Vs. The Iffco Tokio General Insurance Company Limited & Anr. in SLP (C) No.27397/2018 dated 29.04.2025 wherein under identical Signature Not Verified Signed by: PRACHI PANDEY Signing time: 06-10-2025 17:38:59 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:47597 4 MA-3764-2023 circumstances, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has allowed the compensation to the husband of deceased. According to learned counsel, the delay in lodging the FIR has satisfactorily been explained by the claimants and considered by the learned claims Tribunal. With the aforesaid submissions, he prays for dismissing the appeal.

6. Heard the rival submissions of learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

7. Upon hearing the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the appellant, it appears that the instant appeal has been filed on following grounds:-

8. In order to determine the aforesaid issues, it is apt to deal with the merits of the case and so far as issue No.1 regarding lack of territorial jurisdiction is concerned, on perusal of record, it is true that the incident has occurred on 01.10.2020 at Barman Dobhi Road, Kashikhedi, District- Narsinghpur, and the claimants are also residents of same district. Under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 , Section 166 speaks about the application for compensation wherein it is prescribed that an application shall be made at the Signature Not Verified Signed by: PRACHI PANDEY Signing time: 06-10-2025 17:38:59 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:47597 5 MA-3764-2023 option of the claimant, either to the claims Tribunal having jurisdiction over the area in which the accident occurred or to the claims Tribunal within the local limits of whose jurisdiction, the claimant resides or carries on business or within the local limits of whose jurisdiction, the defendant resides, and shall be in such form and contain such particulars as may be prescribed. In the case of Malati Sardar Vs. National Insurance Company Limited and Others reported in (2016) 3 SCC 43 , the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that Section 166 being a benevolent provision, provision for territorial jurisdiction must be interpreted consistent with object of facilitating remedies for victims and any hypertechnical approach should be avoided. There should be no bar to file a claim petition to the jurisdiction of claim Tribunal where insurance company is main contesting party, has its business and running their office since neither is any prejudice caused to party nor is there any failure of justice. The relevant paragraph is also quoted hereinunder:-

Since, in the case at hand, it is undisputed that the deceased took her last breath at Medical Hospital, Jabalpur, and the appellant-Insurance Company has the business and running their office at Jabalpur, therefore, in the light of above quoted pronouncement, this Court comes to the conclusion Signature Not Verified Signed by: PRACHI PANDEY Signing time: 06-10-2025 17:38:59 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:47597 6 MA-3764-2023 that the learned claims Tribunal, Jabalpur, was well within the jurisdiction to hear the claim petition in the peculiar circumstances.

9. As far as second issue regarding delay in lodging the FIR is concerned, the record indicates that the incident had occurred on 01.10.2020 whereas the FIR got registered on 03.11.2020 i.e. after a lapse of 33 days' period. The claimants have given the explanation for such delay that after the incident, they were sent to District Hospital, Kareli, for treatment, where on account of serious injuries to the deceased, she was referred to District Hospital, Narsinghpur, and subsequently, Medical Hospital, Jabalpur, where during treatment, she died. According to the claimants, they have informed to police attached in the Medical Hospital, Jabalpur, and thereafter only, the post-mortem was conducted.

10. It is settled principle of law that the effect of delay in filing the FIR in a motor accident claim case can be significant and may affect the outcome of the claim but the actual impact depends on the circumstances and how the delay is explained. In the present case, this Court finds that the claimants have timely informed the police before conducting the post-mortem of deceased and therefore, there is no reason to create doubt upon the occurance of accident on account of delay in lodging the FIR.

11. Learned counsel for the appellant-Insurance Company has also raised the ground regarding implantation of different vehicles. According to the appellant-Insurance Company, in the documents produced by the claimants before the learned Tribunal vide Exhibits-P/2, P/3 and P/6, it is mentioned that the claimants and deceased were fallen down from their own Signature Not Verified Signed by: PRACHI PANDEY Signing time: 06-10-2025 17:38:59 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:47597 7 MA-3764-2023 vehicle and sustained injuries. In this regard, learned claims Tribunal has found that in the merg enquiry report, the involvement of offending vehicle was found proved and thereupon, the criminal prosecution was lodged against respondent No.3 and this Court feels agreements with the finding given by learned claims Tribunal in this regard.

12. Learned counsel for the appellant- Insurance Company has also raised the ground of contributory negligence on the part of claimant- respondent No.1 and in the context above, on perusal of paragraph-16 of the impugned award, it is seen that the learned claims Tribunal has found that the insurance company has failed to prove any contributory negligence on the part of the claimant- respondent No.1. Upon testing the above findings on the face of record, in the opinion of this Court, no interference is required.

13. So far as the issue regarding dependency of claimant-husband (respondent No.1) is concerned, in the light of settled legal preposition, this Court feels that while traditionally wives and children are considered dependents, however, the Court has recognized husband as dependent upon wife, if the deceased-wife contributed significantly to the household either financially or through unpaid domestic work and the husband was benefitting from her services, especially in the form of managing the household, caring for children or elderly family members and the husband is elderly, unemployed, ill or otherwise significantly reliant on the wife. On several occasions, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that the homemakers' services have monitory value, even if not salaried. The definition of dependent includes those receiving direct or indirect support, emotional, Signature Not Verified Signed by: PRACHI PANDEY Signing time: 06-10-2025 17:38:59 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:47597 8 MA-3764-2023 practical or financial. The Courts have recognized that the loss of services of a homemaker is a loss to the family and the spouse is entitled to compensation. In this case, the learned claims Tribunal has dealt with the said question of dependency of respondent No.1- claimant upon the deceased wife and has noted down the observations in paragraph-25 of the award, perusal whereof, this Court finds that the said observation of learned claims Tribunal is proper and in accordance with law.

14. In view of the above analysis, this Court finds no reason to interfere in the impugned award passed by the learned claims Tribunal, Jabalpur. Accordingly, the appeal fails and is hereby dismissed.

15. There shall be no order as to costs.

(HIMANSHU JOSHI) JUDGE Prachi Signature Not Verified Signed by: PRACHI PANDEY Signing time: 06-10-2025 17:38:59