The main legal point established in the judgment is that compensation under the head of no-fault liability would survive the death of the claimant, and the claim for compensation made under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 would survive after the death of the claimant even in respect of personal injuries not causing the death of the party.

1. This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal arises against the award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ponneri at Tiruvallur District passed in M.C.O.P.No.483 of 2000 on 05.08.2008.

2. At about 07.00 a.m, on 07.01.2000, while the deceased was standing in front of her house, a lorry bearing registration No. AP-16-W-548 driven in a rash and negligent manner, dashed against her owing to which she sustained grievous injuries. Since the first respondent/claimant died during the pendency of claim petition, respondents 2 to 9, who are her husband and children were impleaded as legal heirs. Compensation in a sum of Rs.74,000/-was claimed.

3. Before the Tribunal, on behalf of the claimants, one witness was examined and seven exhibits were marked. None were examined on behalf of the appellant insurance company nor were any exhibits marked.

4. On appreciation of the materials before it, the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.45,000/-under the head Pain and suffering and mental agony with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till the date of deposit.

5. The sole ground urged by learned counsel for the appellant is that the injured claimant died pending disposal of the claim petition and therefore following the maxim 'Actio Personalis moritur cum persona' the tribunal ought not to have awarded compensation and directed payment thereof to the legal representatives who were impleaded pursuant to her death. As the tribunal had awarded the sum of Rs.45,000/-as compensation payable only towards pain and suffering suffered by the deceased/claimant, the order of tribunal is to be set aside.

6. We have heard lengthy submissions of counsel on either side. Very many decisions have been cited before us. Some of them inform that compensation towards pain and suffering could not be afforded subsequent to the death of the injured claimant owing to the operation of the said maxim, principles whereof are found incorporated in Section 306 of the Indian Succession Act. Others inform that the maxim would not be applicable except where specifically engrafted in a statute. The law appears settled atleast to this extent viz., compensation payable under the head no fault liability would survive the death of the claimant and so would the loss caused to his estate. Though generally compensation payable towards pain and suffering is not considered to be the loss to the estate of the deceased, Halsburys' Laws of England, Vol.28, informs that damages there towards could be claimed under such head as loss to the estate. Without dwelling at depth upon the decisions cited before us, we would inform that a claim for compensation made under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 would survive after the death of the claimant even in respect of personal injuries not causing the death of the party for the following reason. In M. Veerappa v. Evelyn Sequeira, AIR 1988 SC 506 the Hon'ble Apex court had held as follows:

"Having regard to the nature of the claim we are not able to comprehend how without any enquiry and recording of evidence the Trial Court and the High Court have proceeded on the basis that the suit claim is based only on tortious liability though the two Courts have reached different conclusions about the abatement of the suit. The learned counsel for the respondent placed reliance upon the summary of the averments in the plaint set out above and argued that the plaintiff had suffered loss of over Rs.20,000 due to the closure of the business and hence the restricted claim of Rs.4,500 is really towards loss suffered by the estate and not a claim made on the basis of the loss of reputation, mental agony, worry etc. suffered by the plaintiff. He further stated that the claim of Rs.1,500 under three heads of Rs.500 each also related to the loss suffered by the estate of the deceased and hence the suit has to proceed for the entire suit claim. Since no discussion has been made and no finding has been rendered on this question and sin