Judgment:
Civil Appeal No.3216 of 2007 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 15012 of
2005)
Dr. Arijit Pasayat, J.-
Leave granted.
An interesting question has been
raised in this appeal about the acceptability of claim for grant of
compensation when the relatives are legal heirs but are not dependants
of the deceased, before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Darrang,
Mangaldoi (in short "Tribunal").
3. Appellant claimed to be the wife
of one Md. Nurul Hoque. She assailed the validity of the order dated
30.5.2005 in Petition No.382/2005 filed by the brothers of aforesaid Md.
Nurul Hoque (hereinafter referred to as the 'deceased') in MAC Case
No.139/2001 filed under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (in short the
'Act').
4. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the brothers of the
deceased did not depend on him and they had no right to file a petition
which was allowed. The High Court found that the widow of a Muslim who
has no issue will get one fourth share in the property of the
deceased-husband and remaining part will go to the brothers. Question
was about the right of the brothers who were not dependants on the
deceased to get their share in the compensation awarded. Accordingly,
the appeal was dismissed.
5. Learned counsel for the appellant
submitted that the High Court was not justified in rejecting the stand
of the appellant. Learned counsel for the respondents, however,
supported the order.
6. Even if there was no dependence,
there is a loss to the estate and a person who is a legal representative
but not dependant can yet be a beneficiary of the estate. It was,
therefore, submitted that a realistic and pragmatic view should be
taken.
7. Section 166 of the Act
corresponds to Section 110 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (hereinafter
referred to as the 'Old Act') and the same reads as follows:
"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-
(a) by the person who has sustained the injury; or
(b) by the owner of the property; or
(c) where death has resulted from the accident, by all or any of the
legal representatives of the deceased; or
(d) by any agent duly authorized by the person injured or all or any of
the legal representatives of the deceased, as the case may be.
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.
(2) Every application under
sub-section
(1) shall be made, at the 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:
rovided that where no claim for
compensation under Section 140 is made in
such application, the application shall
contain a separate statement to that effect
immediately before the signature of the
applicant.
xx xx xx
(4) The Claims Tribunal shall treat any
report of accidents forwarded to it under
sub-section (6) of Section 158 as an
application for compensation under this
Act."
8. In terms of clause (c) of sub-section (1) of Section 166 of
the Act in case of death, all or any of the legal representatives
of the deceased become entitled to compensation and any
such legal representative can file a claim petition. The proviso
to said sub-section makes the position clear that where all
the legal representatives had not joined, then application can
be made on behalf of the legal representatives of the deceased
by impleading those legal representatives as respondents.
9. Section 168 of the Act reads as follows:
"Award of the Claims Tribunal:- On receipt of
an application for compensation made under
Section 166, the Claims Tribunal shall, after
giving notice of the application to the insurer
and after giving the parties (including the
insurer) an opportunity of being heard, hold
an inquiry into the claim or, as the case may
be, each of the claims and, subject to the
provisions of Section 162 may make an award
determining the amount of compensation
which appears to it to be just and specifying
the person or persons to whom compensation
shall be paid and in making the award the
Claims Tribunal shall specify the amount
which shall be paid by the insurer or owner
or driver of the vehicle involved in the
accident or by all or any of them, as the case
may be:
Provided that where such application
makes a claim for compensation under
section 140 in respect of the death or
permanent disablement of any person, such
claim and any other claim (whether made in
such application or otherwise) for
compensation in respect of such death or
permanent disablement shall be disposed of
in accordance with the provisions of Chapter
X.
(2) The Claims Tribunal shall arrange to
deliver copies of the award to the parties
concerned expeditiously and in any case
within a period of fifteen days from the date of
the award.
(3) When an award is made under this
section, the person who is required to pay any
amount in terms of such award shall, within
thirty days of the date of announcing the
award by the Claims Tribunal, deposit the
entire amount awarded in such manner as
the Claims Tribunal may direct."
10. The Tribunal has a duty to make an award, determine
the amount of compensation which is just and proper and
specify the person or persons to whom such compensation
would be paid. The latter part relates to the entitlement of
compensation by a person who claims for the same.
11. According to Section 2(11) of Code of Civil Procedure,
1908 (in short the 'CPC'), "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
devolves on the death of the party so suing or sued. Almost in
similar terms is the definition of legal representative under
the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, i.e. under Section
2(1)(g).
12. As observed by this Court in Custodian of Branches of
BANCO National Ultramarino v. Nalini Bai Naique (AIR 1989
SC 1589) the definition contained in Section 2(11), CPC is
inclusive in character and its scope is wide, it is not confined
to legal heirs only. Instead, it stipulates that a person who
may or may not be legal heir, competent to inherit the
property of the deceased, can represent the estate of the
deceased person. It includes heirs as well as persons who
represent the estate even without title either as executors or
administrators in possession of the estate of the deceased. All
such persons would be covered by the expression 'legal
representative'. As observed in Gujarat State Road Transport
Corporation v. Ramanbhai Prabhatbhai and Anr. (AIR 1987
SC 1690) a legal representative is one who suffers on account
of death of a person due to a motor vehicle accident and need
not necessarily be a wife, husband, parent and child.
13. There are several factors which have to be noted. The
liability under Section 140 of the Act does not cease because
there is absence of dependency. The right to file a claim
application has to be considered in the background of right to
entitlement. While assessing the quantum, the multiplier
system is applied because of deprivation of dependency. In
other words, multiplier is a measure. There are three stages
while assessing the question of entitlement. Firstly, the
liability of the person who is liable and the person who is to
indemnify the liability, if any. Next is the quantification and
Section 166 is primarily in the nature of recovery
proceedings. As noted above, liability in terms of Section 140
of the Act does not cease because of absence of dependency.
14. Section 165 of the Act also throws some light on the
controversy. The explanation includes the liability under
Sections 140 and 163-A.
15. These aspects were highlighted in
Smt. Manjuri Bera v.
The Oriental Insurance Co Ltd. and Anr. (JT 2007 (5) SC 78).
16. Since the basic issue has not been elaborately dealt with
by the High Court, we remit the matter to the High Court to
decide it afresh in the light of the decision in Manjuri's case
(supra).
17. The appeal is disposed of accordingly. No costs.
Print This Judgment
|