M.R. Shah, J.

1. Pursuant to the order passed by the learned Single Judge, Hon'ble the Chief Justice Bhaskar Bhattacharya vide CAV Judgment and order dated 18/11/2013 following question is referred to the Division Bench for its consideration:-

"Whether the view taken by the learned Single Judges of this Court in the decisions referred to above as well as decision of the Division Bench in the case of Surpal Singh L. Gohil v. R.M. Savalia (supra), lay down the correct proposition of law regarding applicability of Section 306 of the Succession Act to a claim-application under Section 166 of the MV Act where the claim for compensation is filed for the personal injuries caused to the claimant and during the pendency of the petition, he died a natural death."

Facts leading to the present First Appeal and leading to the reference to the Division Bench to consider the aforesaid question, in nutshell, are as under:-

1.01. That the original claimant - injured filed claim petition before the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal claiming compensation for the injuries sustained by him in an accident occurred on 23/6/1994. It appears that during the pendency of the claim petition, the original claimant died on 27/11/2005 and thereafter on the basis of an application for substitution, the appellant herein - legal heir - brother of the original claimant was substituted in place of original claimant and the matter was proceeded at the instance of the said heir. That thereafter, the learned Tribunal declared the award. That the heir of the original claimant-appellant herein was not satisfied with the amount of compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal and therefore, the appellant herein - heir and legal representative of original claimant has preferred the present First Appeal before this Court for enhancement of the Award.

1.02. The aforesaid First Appeal came up for hearing before the learned Single Judge and the learned Single Judge was of the opinion that having regard to the provisions contained in Section 306 of the Succession Act, the Appeal at the instance of heir and legal representative of the original claimant for enhancement of the award would not be maintainable.

1.03. The learned Single Judge heard the learned Advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties at length with respect to maintainability of the First Appellant the instance of the heir and legal representative of the original claimant for enhancement of the award having regard to the provisions contained in Section 306 of the Succession Act. While making submissions at the instance of the heir and legal representative of the original claimant for enhancement of the award, the learned Advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties heavily relied upon the number of decisions of this Court as well as various other High Courts inclusive of decision of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Surpal Singh Ladhubha Gohil Versus Raliyatbahen Mohanbhai Vavalia, reported in 2009 (2) GLH 217. However, the learned Single Judge was of the opinion that the provisions of Motor Vehicles Act and Gujarat Motor Vehicle Rules and Order 22 Rule 1 and Section 306 of the Succession Act, where claim for compensation is filed for personal injuries caused to the claimant during the pendency of the petition, the original claimant - injured dies a natural death, there is no provision for substitution of the heirs and thereafter legal heirs cannot proceed further with the claim petition and/or even prefer appeal for enhancement of the compensation. The learned Single Judge, therefore, doubted the correctness of the decisions of this Court as well as various High Court relied upon on behalf of the appellants - heirs of the deceased injured claimant, more particularly decision of the Division Bench in the case of Surpal Singh Ladhubha Gohil (supra) and therefore, has referred the aforesaid question to the Division Bench. That is why the matter is referred to this Cour