Legal representatives can pursue claims for personal injury compensation after the claimant's death, as established by the amended Section 167(5) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

JUDGMENT :

K. VINOD CHANDRAN, J.

1. The original claimant, the injured in a motor accident, had filed the above appeal, seeking enhancement of compensation as awarded by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal¹[for short, ‘the Tribunal’] and enhanced by the High Court. The claimant who was rendered 100% disabled, by reason of the accident, unfortunately died during the pendency of this appeal; on 24.04.2024. The legal representatives have substituted themselves in place of the deceased claimant/injured.

2. Heard, Mr. Shail Kumar Dwivedi, learned counsel for the appellants and Mr.Atul Nigam, learned counsel for the respondent insurance company.

3. The learned counsel for the insurance company raised a preliminary objection in continuing the appeal and considering it, by virtue of the substitution of the deceased claimant by his legal representatives. It is the contention of the insurer that since the claim is of compensation for personal injury, the continuation of the proceedings cannot be permitted by the legal representatives, going by Section 306 of the Indian SUCCESSION ACT , 1925 and as interpreted by a Full Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in Bhagwati Bai and Anr. v. Bablu and Mukund and Ors. , AIR 2007 MP 38 (FB), followed by a Single Judge of the High Court of Allahabad in Saroj Sharma v. State of U.P. , 2014 SCC OnLine ALL 7707.

4. The learned counsel for the respondent relied on a decision of this Court in Meena (Dead) Rep. by LRs. v. Prayagraj and Others., 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1433 which followed another decision of this Court in Oriental Insurance Company Limited v. Kahlon @ Jasmail Singh Kahlon , (2022) 13 SCC 494.

5. We have to first deal with the preliminary objection raised against the continuation of the proceedings after the victim died. The Full Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court on an interpretation of the provisions of the MOTOR VEHICLES ACT , 1988, especially Section 166 , juxtaposed with Section 306 of the Indian SUCCESSION ACT , 1925 held : “…that a claim for personal injury filed under Section 166 of the MOTOR VEHICLES ACT , 1988 would abate on the death of the claimant and would not survive to his legal representatives except as regards the claim for pecuniary loss to the estate of the claimant.” (sic paragraph 15).

6. The answer is simple and clear in so far as the insertion of sub-section (5) to Section 167 by Act 32 of 2019 with effect from 01.04.2022, which reads as under:

“[(5) Notwithstanding anything in this Act or any other law for the time being in force, the right of a person to claim compensation for injury in an accident shall, upon the death of a person injured, survive to his legal representatives, irrespective of whether the cause of death is relatable to or had any nexus with the injury or not.]”

7. The right to claim compensation for the injuries caused in a motor vehicle accident hence survives on the legal representatives of the injured even if the injured dies in the course of the proceedings for reasons not relatable to or having any nexus with the injuries sustained. Here the injured died in 2024, after the insertion to Section 166 by amendment. We also have a difference of opinion with the declaration of law in Bhagwati Bai (supra), which we need not dilate upon in the facts of this case where the inserted provision is squarely applicable.

8. The finding in Kahlon @ Jasmail Singh Kahlon (supra) and Meena (supra) we extract from paragraph 5 of the latter decision which reads as follows:-

“5. At the outset, the learned counsel for the claimants relied on Oriental Insurance Company Limited v. Kahlon @ Jasmail Singh Kahlo