JUDGMENT :

1. The question arises in this appeal as to the meaning of the words ‘legal representatives’ in Section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act.

2. The appeal is preferred by the legal representatives of the deceased under the Motor Vehicles Act claiming compensation. The accident occurred on 16-2-1981 when the deceased was crushed under the wheels of the vehicle belonging to the Setwin. The claim is by the parents, brother and sister of the deceased in a sum of Rs. 50,000/-. The Court below dismi-ssed the petition on the ground that the negligence of the driver of the vehicle was not established. Alternatively, it gave a finding that if the petition were to be allowed, the claimants would be entitled to Rs. 23,000/-.

3. In this appeal preferred by the legal representatives of the deceased, it is contended by Sri S. Hanumaiah that the finding of the lower Court on the question of negligence is erroneous. It is further argued that the Setwin is liable for the damages. It is further argued that having regard to the fact that the deceased was governed by Muhammadan law, the parents, brother and sister of the deceased are also entitled to claim the ‘dependency’.

“The points that aris