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

1989 Supreme(P&H) 687

PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT
G.R.Majithia, J.
Mangal Dass (Deceased By L.Rs.)
Versus
S.S.Sandhu
First Appeal Order No. 1011 of 1988,
Decided On : AUGUST 31, 1989

The legal representatives of a deceased claimant have the right to be substituted as claimants, and the right to sue for compensation in case of the claimant's death survives.

Headnote:

Motor Accident Claims Tribunal - Substitution of Legal Heirs as Claimants - Survival of Right to Sue - The legal representatives of a deceased claimant have the right to be substituted as claimants in a claim application under Section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act. The right to sue for compensation in respect of injuries sustained by the deceased survives, and the legal representatives can claim compensation for loss to the estate of the deceased.

Fact of the Case:

The deceased filed a claim application under Section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act alleging injuries due to negligent driving. The claimant died during the pendency of the application, and the legal heirs sought to be substituted as claimants. The Tribunal dismissed the application for substitution and the claim application.

Finding of the Court:

The court allowed the appeal, set aside the Tribunal's order, and allowed the legal representatives to be brought on record as claimants. The claim petition will be revived and disposed of on merits within three months.

Issues: The issues involved the right of legal representatives to be substituted as claimants and the survival of the right to sue for compensation in case of the claimant's death.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the legal representatives have the right to be substituted as claimants, and the right to sue for compensation in respect of injuries sustained by the deceased survives, allowing the claim for compensation for loss to the estate of the deceased.

Final Decision: The appeal was allowed, the Tribunal's order was set aside, and the legal representatives were allowed to be brought on record as claimants. The claim petition will be revived and disposed of on merits within three months.

Judgment

1. This appeal is directed against the order of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, whereby he dismissed the claim application.

2. The Facts :-

Mangal Dass deceased filed an application under Section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act (for short the Act) against the respondents. He alleged that he received injuries due to rash and negligent driving of the vehicle by respondent No. 1. During the pendency of the application, the claimant died on February 10, 1987 presumably as a result of the injuries suffered in the accident. The widow and the children of the deceased moved an application for substituting them as applicant-claimants in place of the deceased. The application was contested and the Tribunal dismissed the application for substitution filed by the legal heirs of the deceased and also the claim application.

3. It is not clear on what grounds the Tribunal declined the application filed by the legal heirs of the deceased for substituting them as claimants in the claim application. It is also not clear on what basis he held that the right to sue does not survive. A person suing for compensation in respect of the injuries sustained by him under Section 110-A (1) of the Act can claim compensation for physical injury, mental sufferings including any expenses incurred for treatment. He can also claim damages towards loss to property consequent upon the accident. If the compensation is awardable in respect of some of the items resulting in loss to the property of the injured person, there is no bar under Section 110-A(1) of the Act which prohibits a claim for compensation to be made in that behalf. The maxim actio personalis moritur cum persona cannot be invoked, if the accident instead of resulting in an injury resulted in the death of a person. The legal representatives can claim compensation for loss to the estate of the deceased. If an action is initiated by an injured person for compensation in respect of items which-involve loss to his property why should it not survive to the legal representatives when he dies during the pendency of an action.

4. Reference can be usefully be made to a Bench decision rendered in F.A.C. No. 536 of 1979, Joti Ram V/s. Chaman Lal, decided on September 25, 1981 wherein it was held thus:-

"The scope of the provisions of Sec.306, Indian Succession Act and the maxim actio personalis moritur cum persona, therefore, appears to be well-settled and the claim of damages on account of loss to the estate of the injured would not abate on his death."

5. For the aforesaid reasons, the appeal is allowed. The order of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal is set aside. The application moved by the legal representatives of the deceased for bringing them on record is allowed. They are allowed to be brought on record as legal representatives of the deceased claimant. The claim petition will be decided in the light of the aforementioned observations. The order under challenge is set aside. The claim petition will be revived and restored against its original number and will be disposed of on merits keeping in view the observations made above within three months from the date of the receipt of the order. Cost in appeal will abide by the event.

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