Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Kishan Lal And Ors. vs Bharosi Lal And Ors. on 12 September, 2000
Equivalent citations: 2002ACJ1750
JUDGMENT J.C. Verma, J.
1. This civil misc. appeal has been preferred against the dismissal of the claim application.
2. One Khoob Chand had died in a motor accident on 25.5.1998. The deceased was the elder brother of claimant-appellant Nos. 1 and 4 and was brother-in-law of appellant Nos. 2 and 5 and father of appellant No. 3. He had died because of the accident caused by bus No. RJ 14-P 3326 belonging to the Rajasthan State Road Trans. Corporation (hereinafter referred to as 'the Corporation'). He was 60 years of age and was doing the business of fruit vendor. The deceased was unmarried and had adopted a son, i.e., appellant No. 3. Certain issues were framed including issue Nos. 6 and 7 about the maintainability of the claim application on behalf of the brothers, adopted son and other relatives. Without giving any opportunity to the parties, the Tribunal had held that the deceased was an unmarried person and, therefore, the applicant Nos. 1, 2, 4 and 5 were not entitled to maintain the application and they were not the dependants. In regard to adopted son of the deceased, it was noticed that no document has been produced on record to show that he had been adopted and thus had dismissed the claim application in toto.
3. It is contended by learned counsel for the appellants that as per the statutory provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act, it is not necessary that the claim application can only be filed by the dependants. According to the provisions of the Act, the legal representatives are entitled to file the application and the brother is definitely a legal heir of the unmarried deceased. He relies on Gujarat State Road Trans. Corporation v. Ramanbhai Prabhatbhai 1987 ACJ 561 (SC); Bisarti Bai v. M.P. State Road Trans. Corporation 1990 ACJ 103 (MP) and Nirmala Puri v. Gurmel Singh 1999 ACJ 403 (P&H).
4. Admittedly, in the present case, no evidence has been led as yet. It is also not disputed that the claim application can be filed by the legal heirs of the deceased as per the provisions of the Act as contained in Section 166(1)(c) of the Motor Vehicles Act which provides that the application for compensation arising out of the accident of the nature specified in Sub-section (1) of Section 165 may be made, where death has resulted from the accident, by or any of the legal representatives of the deceased. A proviso is also added in this section that where all the legal representatives of the deceased have not joined in any such application for compensation, the application shall be made on behalf of or for the benefit of all the legal representatives who have not so joined, shall be impleaded as respondents to the application. The relevant Section is reproduced as under:
166. Application for compensation.-
(1) An application for compensation arising out of an accident of the nature specified in Sub-section (1) of Section 165 may be made-
xxx xxx xxx
(c) where death has resulted from the accident, by or any of the legal representatives of the deceased:
Provided that where all the legal representatives of the deceased have not joined in any such application for compensation, the application shall be made on behalf of or for the benefit of all the legal representatives of the deceased and the legal representatives who have not so joined, shall be impleaded as respondents to the application.
5. I find merit in the submission of the learned counsel for the appellants that if the contrary view is taken, in the event of death of a person in accident who happens to be an unmarried or whose parents are not living, it shall amount to as if no compensation can be claimed in regard to the death of such persons and such compensation will lead to such an unpleasant situation that the defaulting negligent driver will escape the liability for any such accident for the purpose of compensation. I fully agree with learned counsel for the appellants in this regard and specially when in the present case, application for compensation had also been filed including an adopted son, adoption of which could only be proved by leading evidence as per law.
6. In the case of claiming compensation, the claimants can always prove the dependency or financial assistance being given by the deceased to such claimants and the loss of love and affection in the Indian society which fact can also be proved and is relevant for the purpose of awarding compensation and, therefore, it cannot be said that for claiming compensation in the cases in the present situation, the application would not lie at all. Hence, the order of the Tribunal cannot be upheld.
7. For the foregoing reasons, I accept this appeal, set aside the order impugned with direction to the Tribunal to proceed with the claim application on merits. The misc. appeal is allowed with the above said observations.