Legal representatives under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act are not limited to spouse, parent, and children, but also include brothers and other dependents.

JUDGMENT :

Ajay Kumar Gupta, J:

1. This instant First Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed by the appellants/claimants challenging the judgment and award dated 13th December, 2006 passed by Learned Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Paschim Medinipur thereby the learned Tribunal dismissed the MACC Case No. 739 of 2000 filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 on account of death of victim on contest against the Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. and ex parte against the owner of the offending vehicle.

2. The brief facts of this case are as under:

On 27.04.1999 at about 20.15 hours petitioners’ sister Rajia Bibi and others were returning their home along the left side of N.H.-6 after witnessing Muharram festival. At the same time, a truck bearing registration no. WB-29/2769, coming from Panskura side at high speed in rash and negligent manner and endangering human life and safety suddenly dashed her from the back side with great force. She sustained serious injuries and died enroute during removal to the hospital. A written complaint was lodged on the same day resulting in registration of Panskura P.S. Case No. 54/99 dated 27.04.1999 under Sections 279/337/338/427 IPC and same was started against the driver of the offending truck. Due to sudden death of the deceased, the legal heirs and legal representatives of the deceased filed a claim application under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act claiming compensation to the tune of Rs. 1,50,000/-with interest from the presentation of the application till realization.

The Oriental Insurance Company Limited contested the case by filing written statement thereby denied and disputed the allegations made by the claimants and finally prayed for rejection of the same.

To prove the case of the claimants, the claimants have examined two witnesses as P.W. 1 and P.W. 2. P.W. 1, Sk. Kader Ali is one of the claimants and P.W. 2 is Joydeb Khan as eye witness. Both of them corroborated the date, time and manner of accident by oral and documentary evidence. FIR, Charge Sheet etc. marked as Exhibits 1 to 3 respectively. However, the learned Tribunal Judge, after scanning and considering the evidence of the parties, finally held that the accident was occurred due to the rash and negligent manner on the part of the driver of the offending truck. However, the learned Tribunal discarded that the claimants being brothers of the deceased were not dependent upon their sister. As such they are not entitled to get compensation. The claimants are.

3. Under the above facts and circumstances, the appeal came up before this Bench for disposal.

Submissions on behalf of the Appellants/Claimants:

4. Learned advocate appearing on behalf of the appellants/claimants submitted there are no disputes regarding manner of the accident and expiry of the victim due to motor vehicle accident occurred on 27.04.1999 at about 20.15 hours. Claimants have specifically proved that the offending vehicle was involved and due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle, the said pathetic accident was occurred and the victim sustained serious injuries and finally succumbed to such injuries. It is also not disputed by the Insurance Company about the accident and involvement of the offending vehicle no. WB-29/2769.

5. It is further submitted that the deceased died leaving behind her three brothers who are the present appellants/claimants. They are the legal representatives of the deceased. Accordingly, they are entitled to get compensation from the Insurance Company. Being the legal heirs/legal representatives, they are entitled to file and get compensation from the insurance company because the compensation amount is ultimately the estate of the deceased. To bolster his submissions, the learned counsel placed reliance of four judgments as under:

i. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation, Ahmedabad Vs. Ramanbhai Prabhatbhai & Anr., 1987 AIR 1690, 1987 (3) SCC 234.

ii. Mrs. Hafizun Begum Vs. Md. Ikram Heque