SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1991 Supreme(P&H) 207

PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT
J.V.Gupta, J.
Kashi Ram
Versus
State Of Haryana
Civil Revision No. 600 of 1990,
Decided On : FEBRUARY 19, 1991

The right to sue does not survive without loss to the estate of the deceased under the Motor Vehicles Act.

Headnote:

Legal Representatives - Motor Vehicles Act - Right to sue does not survive without loss to the estate of the deceased

Fact of the Case:

Kashi Ram filed a claim petition for injuries suffered in an accident, but died during the pendency of the claim petition. His sons and daughters claimed to be his legal representatives, but the application was opposed by the respondent.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that since there was no allegation of loss to the estate of Kashi Ram, the right to sue did not survive, and the application to bring his sons and daughters on record as legal representatives was not maintainable. Consequently, the claim petition was dismissed.

Issues: The main issue was whether the sons and daughters of the deceased were entitled to be brought on the record as his legal representatives, despite the absence of any allegation of loss to the estate of the deceased.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that in the absence of any allegation of loss to the estate of the deceased, the petitioners could not claim themselves to be brought on the record as his legal representatives, as the claim petition was filed on account of the injuries suffered by the deceased.

Final Decision: The revision petition failed and was dismissed with no order as to costs.

Judgment

J.V.Gupta, J.

1. Kashi Ram, now deceased, filed a claim petition under Section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, on account of the injuries suffered by him in accident which had taken place on March 23, 1988. During the pendency of the claim petition, he died. An application was filed on behalf of his sons and daughters claiming themselves to be the legal representatives of the deceased. The said application was opposed by the respondent on the ground that such an application was not maintainable. The learned Tribunal came to the conclusion:

In the present case, where there is no allegation of loss to the estate of Kashi Ram, the right to sue does not survive. The application is not maintainable.

Consequently, the claim petition of Kashi Ram was dismissed as it could not proceed further.

2 The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that since there was a loss to the estate of Kashi Ram, deceased, his sons and daughters were entitled to be brought on the record, as his legal representatives. In support of the contention, the learned counsel relied upon Joti Ram V/s. Chaman Lal 1984 ACJ 645 (P&H).

3. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, I do not find any merit in this contention.

4. It could not be successfully argued that there is any allegation in the petition that there was any loss to the estate of Kashi Ram, deceased. In the absence of any such allegation, the petitioners could not claim themselves to be brought on the record as his legal representatives as the claim petition was filed on account of the injuries suffered by the deceased Kashi Ram.

5. Consequently, this revision petition fails and is dismissed with no order as to costs.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top