The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of the term 'legal representative' under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, to include spiritual relationships and inheritance principles, allowing the claimant to maintain the application for compensation.

DIPAK MISRA, J. :- In this appeal preferred under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for brevity 'the Act' substantiality and legal acceptability of the Award passed by the Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sonkutch, District Dewas (for short 'the tribunal') in Claim Case No. 99/97 dated 30-9-1997 is called in question by the claimant/appellant (hereinafter referred to as 'the claimant').

2. The facts which are imperative to be exposited for adjudication of this appeal, in essence, are that Mahant Harnamdasji was proceeding to Allahabad from Indore along with other Sadhus and his Guru Mahant Poorandas on 8-1-1995 in a Jeep bearing registration No. MP-09 H-4768. The first respondent, Lalaram, the driver of the Jeep due to his rash and negligent driving lost control over the vehicle as a consequence of which the same got dashed against a 'Palash' tree. In the accident Harnamdas breathed his last on the spot. One Devchandra sustained injuries and eventually expired on 15-1-1995 at Choithram Hospital, Indore.

3. The claimant, Mahant Shyamdas, initiated an action under Section 166 of the Act contending, inter alia, that he was the "Guru Bhai", the spiritual brother of deceased. Harnamdas who was earning about Rs. 20,000/- per year from donation and from performance of religious rites and rituals. It was put forth that the claimant had performed the funeral rites of said Harnamdas and immense loss had been caused to him inasmuch as he had lost his source of sustenance and also suffered mental agony. On the aforesaid base he claimed compensation for a sum of Rs. 5,60,000/-.

4. The aforesaid claim of the claimant/appellant was resisted by the respondent insurer on the foundation that the claim put forth by the claimant was bound to founder as the application preferred by him was not maintainable, for the claimant is not the legal representative of deceased Harnamdas and further Harnamdas was a gratuitous passenger in the Jeep. That apart, a stand was taken that the driver had no license and there had been breach of terms and conditions of the policy.

5. On the basis of the pleadings on record, the tribunal addressed to the issues whether the accident had occurred due to the negligence of the driver of the vehicle in question and in the said accident the deceased died; whether the claimant could be treated as the legal representative and successor of the deceased; whether the terms and conditions of the insurance policy had been violated to absolve the insurer from the liability; and whether the claimant is entitled in law to get compensation and if so, what could be the resultant quantum.

6. On delineation on the aforesaid spectrums and in the backdrop of material brought on record, the tribunal came to hold that the accident had occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the first respondent; that Mahant Harnamdas had died in the accident; that there had been no breach of terms and conditions of the policy; and that the claimant is the successor and legal representative of Harnamdas and hence, is entitled to compensation; that Harnamdas was sixty-eight years of age; that the claimant had not been able to prove any major damage caused to the Ashram of which said Harnamdas was the Mahant; that the appellant Mahant Shyamdas has suffered mental agony; and that he is entitled to receive Rs. 50,000.00 towards compensation. Be it noted the Tribunal had also directed that the aforesaid amount would carry interest at the rate of 12% p.a. from 19-6-1995 till the date of payment.

7. Assailing the soundness of the award, it is contended by Mr. R. K. Vyas, learned counsel for the appellant that the award passed by the tribunal is absolutely faulty inasmuch as the tribunal has not computed the loss sustained by the claimant despite returning a finding that he was the legal representative of Guru Harnamdas, the deceased. It is his further submission that the tribunal has fallen into grave error by not considering the fa