The legal representatives of a deceased driver who died due to his own negligence while driving a vehicle cannot maintain an application for compensation under Section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, against the employers or the insurance company. The proper forum for such a claim is the authority under the Workmen's Compensation Act.

1. - This appeal Under Section 110-D of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (hereinafter to be referred to as 'the Act') has been preferred against an award of the Claims Tribunal, Jodhpur, dated April 30, 1979, by which the appellant and respondents Chimne Ram, Labu Ram and Bhiya Ram were directed to pay a sum of Rs. 15,860/- as compensation to the legal representatives of the deceased Rawat Ram.

2. Briefly recalled' the facts giving rise to this appeal is that Bhiya Ram, Chimne Ram and Labu Ram were the owners of Tractor bearing No. R.S.Q. 4879. Rawat Ram was their real brother whom they had employed as a driver on the said tractor. Thus, Rewat Ram was a paid driver of Bhiya Ram and Labu Ram on the tractor which was insured with the appellant Insurance Company. Rewat Ram was driving the tractor on 22-5-1976 and when it reached somewhere in between villages Devapada and Bhundana it capsized. As a result Rawat Ram fell down and came under the tractor. He sustained multiple injuries as a result of which he died on the spot. He is survived by his widow Mst. Shanti and three minor children. The widow and the minors through her presented an application before the Tribunal Under Section 110-A of the Act against the owners, the Insurance Company and the United Commercial Bank claiming a sum of Rs. 1,10,000/- as compensation. It was alleged that Rewat Ram died while he was in the employment of the owners of the tractor and was driving it in the course of his employment. The United Commercial Bank was impleaded as a party because it had lent money to the owners in purchasing the tractor. The application for compensation was contested by the Insurance Company. It was stated by the Insurance Company in its written statement that the claim is not genuine. Rewat Ram himself was an owner of the tractor along with his brothers. The application for compensation was not maintainable as he died on account of his own rashness and negligence in driving the tractor. Bhiya Ram who is one of the co-owners of the tractor submitted the written statement admitting the entire claim therein. The other persons did not out in appearance despite service of notice on them. As such, the application was tried ex-parte against them. The Tribunal raised necessary issues and recorded the evidence of the parties. On the conclusion of the trial the Tribunal held that Rawat Ram died while he was driving the tractor. He was employed as a driver on the tractor by its owner and that the claimants being his legal representatives, are entitled to recover a sum of Rs. 15,360/- as compensation from the owners and the Insurer of the tractor. An award was, accordingly, made by the Tribunal. Aggrieved against the said order, the National Insurance Company has come up in appeal.

3. I have heard the learned Counsel appearing for the parties and perused the record carefully.

4. Mr. A.K. Mathur, learned Counsel appearing for the appellant- Insurance Company, vehmently contended that the claims Tribunal had no 2. Jurisdiction to entertain the a application for compensation. It was argued that Rewat Ram was driving the tractor RSQ 4879 and he died an account of his own rash and negligent driving of the tractor. As such no application for compensation by his legal representatives was maintainable in the Claims Tribunal. It was argued that nobody can reap an advantage of his own wrong. Since the Claims Tribunal had no jurisdiction to entertain the application for compensation under the Act it could not pass any order directing the appellant and the owners of the tractor to pay compensation.

5. Reliance in support of the contention was placed on D. Jayamma aud Anr. v. S. Govindaswamv and Ors. 1982 ACJ 467 , B.Prabhakar v. Bachima 1984 ACJ 582 and Smt. Hansibai and Ors. v. The National Insurance Co. and Ors. (S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 78/1977 decided by this Court on 12-12-1984 .

6. Mr. Parihar, learned Counsel appearing for the claimants strived his best to support the finding of