The main legal point established in the judgment is the entitlement of the appellant to compensation for loss of dependency under the Motor Vehicles Act and the Fatal Accidents Act, based on the substantive rights provided by the Acts.

( 1 ) THIS appeal arises out of the judgment and award made in m. v. c. no. 181 of 1986 disposed of on 15th april, 1989 by the additional district judge and m. a. c. t. ii, Bangalore rural district, bangalore, by which the learned member of the tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 15,000/- as the compensation payable under section 92-a of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (hereinafter referred to as 'the act' ).

( 2 ) THE appellant has taken a number of grounds to assail the conclusion of the tribunal, the main grounds of them being (1) rejection of the claims of wife and mother, who died during the pendency of the petition, of the deceased ramegowda, on the ground that the petition did not survive on their death, they being only l. rs. And dependants of the deceased, was wrong and (2) the finding of the tribunal that the appellant being not the dependant of the deceased was not entitled to compensation for loss of dependency, was also unsustainable.

( 3 ) WE have heard the learned counsel on both sides.

( 4 ) SRI chinnappa, learned counsel appearing for the insurer, contended that on the death of claimants 1 and 2, dependants of the deceased referred to above, the court below was right in having rejected the claim of puttaswamy gouda, the appellant herein, on the ground that, he was not the dependant of the deceased as he was residing separately with his family having his own independent income.

( 5 ) RULE 360 under clause vii, providing for motor accidents claims tribunal Rules of the Karnataka motor vehicles rules, 1963 provides:"360. Code of Civil Procedure to apply in certain cases. the following provisions of the first schedule to the code of civil procedure, 1908, shall so far as may be, apply to proceedings before the claims tribunals namely, order v, Rules 9 to 13 and 15 to 30, order dc, order xiii, Rules 3 to 10, order xvi, Rules 2 to 21, order xvii, order xxiii, Rules 1 to 3 and order xli, rule 5, sub-rules (2) to (5 ). "

( 6 ) EVEN though order 22, cpc, which deals with death, marriage and insolvency of parties and consequential right to sue is excluded from application to cases coming before thetribunal, sub-rule (2) of rule 342 thereof provides that 'legal representative' shall have the meaning assigned to it under clause (ii) of section 2 of the cpc. Section 2 (ii), cpc, reads thus: "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. " therefore, in the face of the above provisions, we will have to see whether the finding of the tribunal that the appellant was not entitled to any compensation for loss of dependency, being not the dependant of the deceased and once the dependants-claimants 1 and 2 died, is correct or not.

( 7 ) REFERRING to the right of the l. rs. To seek compensation, the Supreme Court had an occasion to deal with this question in Gujarat state road transport corporation, Ahmedabad hmedabad v ramanbhai prabhatbhai and another. Considering the question arising under section 1-a of the fatal accidents Act, to bring a person on record as l. r. , of the deceased, Supreme Court held as follows:"the expression 'legal representative' has not been defined in the act. However, a legal representative ordinarily means a person who in law represents the estate of a deceased person or a person on whom the estate devolves on the death of an individual. The proviso to sub-section (1) of section 110-a of the motor vehicles act appears to be of some significance. It provides that the application for compensation shall be made on behalf of or for the benefit of All the legal representatives of the deceased. Section 110-a (1) thus expressly states that (i) an application for compensation may be made by the legal representatives of the deceased or thei