No succession certificate was required for the withdrawal of the awarded amount and the court directed the father to deposit a sum for the claimant's welfare and medical expenses.

D.K. Sinha, J.

1. The present Misc. Appeal under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 is directed against the judgment/award passed by the Motor Vehicles Accident Claims Tribunal, Hazaribagh in Claim Case No. 148 of 1998 on 25.8.2006 whereby the respondent Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. was directed to pay a sum of Rs. 1,50,000/- to the appellant from the date of filing of the claim case subject to production of her succession certificate before the Claims Tribunal.

2. The fact of the case in short was that while the deceased Ganesh Karmali was sitting on a "chabutra" (Platform), engaged in gossiping with his co-villager Rameshwar Ram by the side of the road near Bharat Metal at Kuju, the offending truck bearing registration No. BPL-5935 dashed him causing injuries on his head as a result of which he instantaneously died at the spot. The co-villager Rameshwar Ram also sustained injuries and in the same sequence an Ambassador Car bearing registration No. BPY-5436 also sustained damage giving rise to Mandu P.S. Case No. 93 of 1998 on 27.3.1998 has been instituted.

3. The contention of the appellant was two fold viz.

(i) That the compensation awarded to her was inadequate and

(ii) The production of succession certificate by the claimant- appellant Most. Gudaki Devi for receiving payment of claim amount was uncalled for.

4. Learned Counsel submitted that the monthly income of the deceased assessed @ Rs. 1,050/- was of wrong notion as against the settled principle of law that even an unknown earning person dies, his monthly income could be assessed Rs. 1,500/- per month and that multiplier of 20 was an improper application for the calculation of the accumulated claim amount.

5. The impugned judgment/award indicated that the claimant-appellant was a mentally retarded lady and her marriage with the deceased and she being the legal heir/legal representative of the deceased could not be disputed through the evidence beyond doubt, particularly when the owner of the truck in question and the Insurer Oriental Insurance Company denied the fact that she was the heir and legal representative of the deceased and therefore, a succession certificate was demanded from the claimant for the withdrawal as also medical fitness certificate to the satisfaction of the tribunal.

6. We further find that while adjudicating the issue No. 1.

Whether the case is maintainable or not?

7. The tribunal decided it in favour of the claimant by observing that:

Since, the present claim case has been filed by the claimant as wife of the deceased who died in a Motor Vehicle Accident, the present claim case appears to be maintainable in law. Accordingly, issue No. 1 is also decided against the opposite parties. No cross objection has been file in respect of such finding of the tribunal by the respondents.

8. In the facts and circumstances, we find that there was no necessity for the claimant-appellant to obtain a succession certificate for withdrawal of the awarded amount as being the only heir and legal representative of the deceased.

9. By the order dated 9.1.2008 this Court has observed that:

Before disposing of the appeal, we direct the father of the claimant to produce the claimant before the Director, RINPAS, Ranchi.

The Doctor concerned shall examine the claimant and submit a report to this Court by 16th of January, 2008.

Let a copy of this order be communicated to the Director, RINPAS, Ranchi forthwith.

Let a copy of this order be also supplied to the learned Counsel appearing for the claimant so that he may produce it before the Director, RINPAS, Ranchi.

10. The report of the Medical Superintendent, Ranchi Institute of Neuro-Psychiatry and Allied Sciences (RINPAS) dated 16.1.2008 was produced on record on 21.1.2008 wherein it was stated that the claimant-appellant aged about 35 years daughter of Shri Bhuneshwar Karmali was brought by her father on 15.1.2008 in RINPAS OPD for her mental status examination and treatment. Upon mental status examination and psycho