Gujarat High Court
Bhuriben Wd/O Bhagabhai Sonabhai Alias ... vs Ismailbhai Miyaji Alias Mamjibhai ... on 3 December, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/111/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 03/12/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 111 of 2022
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR
============================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
============================================
BHURIBEN WD/O BHAGABHAI SONABHAI ALIAS HONABHAI TARAL &
ORS.
Versus
ISMAILBHAI MIYAJI ALIAS MAMJIBHAI RAJPURA & ORS.
============================================
Appearance:
MR KK THAKKAR(2834) for the Appellant(s) No. 1,2,3,4
MR CHIRAYU A MEHTA(3256) for the Defendant(s) No. 4
MR NIKUNJ D BALAR(2763) for the Defendant(s) No. 3
MR RATHIN P RAVAL(5013) for the Defendant(s) No. 2
MR.HIREN M MODI(3732) for the Defendant(s) No. 7,8
RULE SERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 1,5,6
============================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR
Date : 03/12/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
1) Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the common judgment and award dated 29.01.2021, passed by learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Main), Palanpur, District - Banaskantha, (hereinafter referred to as "the Tribunal" for short), in Motor Accident Claim Petition No.292 of 2013, wherein, the learned Tribunal was pleased to pass judgment in favour of respondent Page 1 of 8 Uploaded by ANKIT YOGESHBHAI JANSARI(HCW0109) on Sat Dec 06 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Dec 08 20:37:26 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/111/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 03/12/2025 undefined nos.7 and 8 herein - original claimants therein in connection of death of Bhagabhai Sonabhai @ Honabhai Taral. Against the said judgment the appellants - original claimants of MAC Petition No.283 of 2013, have preferred the present appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act" for short).
2) The respondent nos.7 and 8 are the original claimants of MAC Petition No.292 of 2013 which is unchallenged before this Court, wherein, alleged that they have filed the separate claim petition in connection of death of Bhagabhai Sonabhai claiming that the respondent no.7 is second wife of the deceased and instead of joining her as party in the claim petition as opponent the claim petition was filed. Both the claim petitions were decided together by way of common judgment.
3) It is the case of the original claimants that on 10.09.2013 the deceased along with other were travelling in the Jeep of their acquaintance bearing Reg. No.GJ-02-K-0219. At that time the driver of the Dumper bearing Reg. No. GJ-08-Z-5583 came driving the said Dumper at high speed and in rash and negligent manner from the opposite side and dashed with the jeep. As a result of which the deceased sustained grievous injuries and later succumbed to the same. The driver of the Dumper fled away from the place of accident which occurred due to his negligent driving. Therefore, the original claimants have filed MAC Petition No.283 of 2013, seeking compensation. After appreciating the evidence produced on record the learned Tribunal was pleased to partly allowed the claim petition.
Page 2 of 8 Uploaded by ANKIT YOGESHBHAI JANSARI(HCW0109) on Sat Dec 06 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Dec 08 20:37:26 IST 2025NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/111/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 03/12/2025 undefined
4) Heard learned Advocate Mr. K. K. Thakkar for the appellants and learned Advocate Mr. H. M. Modi for the respondent nos.7 and 8, whereas, the remaining respondents were duly served but did not remain present before this Court.
5) Learned Advocate for the appellants has submitted that the impugned judgment is illegal and unjust and respondent nos.7 and 8 have no right to file any claim petition and the learned Tribunal has wrongly interpreted the provision of law and committed error in awarding compensation. He has further submitted that as per Section 161 of the Act second claim petition in connection of death of same person is not maintainable and the learned Tribunal ought to have passed order to join the respondent nos.7 and 8 as party as alleged proceeding was filed without joining or impleading the party. He has further submitted that as per Sections 5(I) and 11 of the Hindu Marriage Act, second marriage is void and hence second wife of the deceased is not entitled for any compensation. He has further submitted that the respondent no.7 - second wife was aware of the fact that the first wife of the deceased is alive, hence, she does not have any right for compensation and similar view is taken by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Badshah Vs Urmila Badshah Godse, reported in 2014 (1) Supreme Court Cases 188. Even in the cross-examination she has stated that first wife is alive and she is not dependent of the deceased. Hence, he has requested to allow the present appeal and dismiss the claim petition and quash and set aside the judgment passed by the learned Tribunal in MAC Petition No.292 of 2013. Alternatively, he has submitted that while passing judgment the learned Tribunal has committed error in making Page 3 of 8 Uploaded by ANKIT YOGESHBHAI JANSARI(HCW0109) on Sat Dec 06 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Dec 08 20:37:26 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/111/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 03/12/2025 undefined apportionment, while making apportionment the learned Tribunal has passed order in the ratio of 50:50 and out of which 35% amount is ordered to be paid to widow of the deceased and 15% amount is ordered to be paid to the daughter of the deceased. Hence, he has requested to award more apportionment in favour of the daughter. He has relied on the judgment of the Hon'ble Madras High Court before the Madurai Bench, in case of Susila and Ors. Vs S. Thirumalai and Ors., in CMA (MD) No.681 of 2019, dated 10.04.2023.
6) Learned Advocate for the respondent nos.7 and 8 has opposed the present appeal on the ground that the learned Tribunal has not committed any error while passing the impugned judgment. As the deceased belonged to Scheduled Tribes and as per custom second marriage is permissible and respondent no.7 is legally married wife of the deceased and sufficient documents including Birth Certificate of the respondent no.8 is produced on the record. In her cross-examination also nothing come out which reveals that the respondent no.7 is not the second wife of the deceased and during the said wedlock one daughter is born and the said fact remains unchallenged. Merely the learned Advocate for the appellant relying on cross-examination and one line wherein she has admitted that Bhuriben i.e. present appellant is the first wife of the deceased but said admission is not enough. In the said cross-examination she has stated that the deceased was residing with both the wives. Merely for sometime the deceased resided with present appellant does not mean that the respondent no.7 is not the second wife of the deceased and to maintain herself she is also earning. Further from the cross-examination it reveals that prior to the marriage Page 4 of 8 Uploaded by ANKIT YOGESHBHAI JANSARI(HCW0109) on Sat Dec 06 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Dec 08 20:37:26 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/111/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 03/12/2025 undefined with the deceased she was married with one another person and out of that wedlock three children were born and after second marriage she is not married to anyone and during the second marriage one daughter is born who is joined as respondent no.8 herein. In support of the fact that she is second wife of the deceased she has produced copies of Ration Card, Election Card and Birth Certificate of the respondent no.8 wherein in column of father name, name of deceased is mentioned. Thus it is clearly proved that the respondent no.7 is second wife of the deceased.
7) So far issue of filing of claim petition is concerned, provisions of the Succession Act or Hindu Marriage Act are not applicable for getting compensation. Under Section 166 of the Act word "Legal Representatives" is used and the word legal representative is explained in Section 2(11) of the Code of Civil Procedure which defines as under :
"2(11). " Legal representative" means a person who in law represents the estate of a deceased person, and includes any person who intermeddles with the estate of the deceased and where a party sues or is sued in a representative character the person on whom the estate devolved on the death of the party so suing or sued."
8) The Hon'ble Supreme Court in a judgment in case of Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation Vs. Ramanbhai Prabhatbhai and another, reported in (1987) 3 SCC 234, has held that legal representative who suffered on account of the death of the person due to motor vehicular accident should have remedy for compensation i.e. provided by the Section 110- A to 110-F of the old Motor Vehicles Act. Said provisions are in consonance with the law of tort and further injury the Tribunal as to determine the compensation which appears to be just as Page 5 of 8 Uploaded by ANKIT YOGESHBHAI JANSARI(HCW0109) on Sat Dec 06 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Dec 08 20:37:26 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/111/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 03/12/2025 undefined provided under Section 110-B of the Act.
9) Herein from the evidence it appears that the respondent nos.7 and 8 are dependents of the deceased and they live together hence, being dependent also and legal representatives also they are entitled to fie the claim petition. In this regard reference is required to be drawn to the case of N. Jaysree & Ors Vs Cholamandalam MS General Insurance Company Ltd., reported in AIRONLINE 2021 SC 923, wherein, in paragraphs 14 and 16 it has been held as under:-
"14. The MV Act does not define the term 'legal representative'. Generally, 'legal representative' means a person who in law represents the estate of the deceased person and includes any person or persons in whom legal right to receive compensatory benefit vests. A 'legal representative' may also include any person who intermeddles with the estate of the deceased. Such person does not necessarily have to be a legal heir. Legal heirs are the persons who are entitled to inherit the surviving estate of the deceased. A legal heir may also be a legal representative.
16. In our view, the term 'legal representative' should be given a wider interpretation for the purpose of Chapter XII of MV Act and it should not be confined only to mean the spouse, parents and children of the deceased. As noticed above, MV Act is a benevolent legislation enacted for the object of providing monetary relief to the victims or their families. Therefore, the MV Act calls for a liberal and wider interpretation to serve the real purpose underlying the enactment and fulfil its legislative intent. We are also of the view that in order to maintain a claim petition, it is sufficient for the claimant to establish his loss of dependency. Section 166 of the MV Act makes it clear that every legal representative who suffers on account of the death of a person in a motor vehicle accident should have a remedy for realization of compensation."Page 6 of 8 Uploaded by ANKIT YOGESHBHAI JANSARI(HCW0109) on Sat Dec 06 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Dec 08 20:37:26 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/111/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 03/12/2025 undefined
10) In view of above the learned Tribunal has not committed any error in allowing the claim petition and in granting compensation in favour of the claimants. The concept of dependent in MV Act is totally distinguished from inheritance of the estate of the deceased under the succession law hence arguments canvassed by the learned Advocate for the appellants based on Hindu Marriage Act or Succession Act is not acceptable and even the Hindu Marriage Act permits the marriage by custom and in affidavit it is clearly mentioned that in the caste of claimants second marriage is permissible. Learned Advocate has also relied on Badshah Vs Urmila (supra) which is under the Code of Criminal Procedure and issue is decided regarding maintenance of second wife and maintainability is decided wherein second marriage was performed as per Hindu rites but during subsistence of first marriage of husband. Herein due to custom second marriage was performed and as discussed above for getting compensation under MV Act more particularly under Chapter XII of the MV Act the term legal representatives is clearly mentioned. Hence, authorities relied by the learned Advocate for the appellants would not avail any assistance, even in the case of Lalita Vs M.R. Sunilkumar and Ors, reported in 2016 ACJ 79, it is held that second wife could be considered as a dependent.
11) Now further learned Advocate for the appellants has raised grievance alternatively to pass order for apportionment in favour of daughter respondent no.8. It is needless to say that both the matters tried together and in favour of legal representatives of the deceased of both the claim petitions compensation was awarded and subsequently equal shares are awarded. The Page 7 of 8 Uploaded by ANKIT YOGESHBHAI JANSARI(HCW0109) on Sat Dec 06 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Dec 08 20:37:26 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/111/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 03/12/2025 undefined appellants have also received 50% share of the compensation and remaining 50% is awarded to the respondent nos.7 and 8 and inter-se apportionment qua claimants of MAC Petition No.292 of 2013, wherein, the appellants are not the parties and they have nothing to do with the said compensation which came into share of the respondent nos.7 and 8. The learned Tribunal has properly exercised the jurisdiction and made apportionment, therefore, in view of above present appellants have no jurisdiction to challenge apportionment which is made in favour of claimants of another claim petition wherein the present appellants are not party.
12) In view of above discussion no interference is required with the judgment and award dated 29.01.2021, passed by learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Main.), Palanpur, District - Banaskantha, in MAC Petition No.292 of 2013 .
13) Record and proceedings (if any) be remitted back to the concerned Tribunal forthwith.
14) Accordingly, the present appeal stands dismissed.
(HASMUKH D. SUTHAR,J) ANKIT JANSARI Page 8 of 8 Uploaded by ANKIT YOGESHBHAI JANSARI(HCW0109) on Sat Dec 06 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Dec 08 20:37:26 IST 2025