( 1 ) HETHER on the death of injured claimant, claim petition filed by him abates or right to sue survives to his heirs and legal representatives, is the question which arises for consideration in this revision application. Deceased Vinodbhai Mangaldas Patel filed a Claim Petition being M. A. C. P. No. 86 of 1988 before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal No. 11 (Aux.), ahmedabad under Sec. 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, claiming compensation against the applicant, i. e. , Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation ltd. , and opponent No. 5, i. e. , Shri Laljibhai Keshavbhai Chaudhari, who was driving the offending bus belonging to the applicant. In the said application, vinodbhai Patel claimed compensation of Rs. 15 lakhs on account of personal injuries sustained by him as a result of vehicular accident which took place on 28/12/1987 due to rash and negligent driving of S. T. bus by the opponent No. 5.

( 2 ) DURING the pendency ofe the claim petition, the original claimant Shri vinodbhai expired on 11/11/1989. Thereupon opponents Nos. 1 to 4 herein submitted an application Exh. 14 praying that they be impleaded in the claim proceedings before the Tribunal in their capacity as heirs and legal representatives of the original claimant. In the said application Exh. 14, the opponents Nos. 1 to 4 averred that the deceased expired on 11/11/1989 due to the injuries sustained by him in the vehicular accident. It was mentioned in the said application that though the deceased expired on 11/11/1989 and post-mortem was performed at V. S. Hospital on 12/11/1989, they were awaiting the report from the authorities indicating the cause of death and, therefore, the application could not be filed in time. It was further stated in the said application that, till the date of filing of the application, the post-mortem report was not received by them and that two days before the date of filing of the application they were informed that the report would not be made available to them. It was also claimed by them that they were given to understand that for the purpose of being impleaded as heirs and legal representatives, it was not necessary to have the report indicating cause of death the deceased and on being informed that the death of the deceased was caused because of the injuries sustained in the accident, they were presenting the application for bringing them on the record of the claim petition as heirs and legal representatives of the original claimant. After pointing out the fact that they suffered mental shock due to the tragic death of the deceased claimant, they prayed that the delay, if any, in bringing them on the record of the case as heirs and legal representatives of the deceased claimant be condoned. The said application was presented on 4/09/1990. By passing an order on 15/11/1990, the learned Judge fixed the application for hearing and reply. The application was contested by the applicant.

( 3 ) THE Tribunal heard both the parties and has granted the application vide order dated 4/02/1992, giving rise to the present revision application which is filed under Sec. 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

( 4 ) THE learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that, with the death of the original claimant who was suing in his personal capacity the applicant and the opponent No. 5 for compensation for the injuries sustained by him in the accident, the cause of action did not survive and as the cause of action died with the claimant, the application Exh. 14 submitted by the opponent Nos. 1 to 4 ought to have been dismissed by the Tribunal. Elaborating the said argument further, it was contended that Sec. 306 of the indian Succession Act in terms provides that, all demands whatsoever and all rights to prosecute for any action or special proceedings in favour or against person at the time of his death survive to and against executors or administrators except cause of action for defamation, assault, as defined in the Indian