THE LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES OF A PERSON WHO DIES IN A MOTOR ACCIDENT CAN CLAIM COMPENSATION BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL BY AN APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 166 OF THE ACT. WHERE THE INJURED DIES HIS NATURAL DEATH AND NOT BECAUSE OF INJURIES SUFFERED IN A MOTOR ACCIDENT, THE LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES WOULD BE ENTITLED TO PURSUE THE CLAIM TO THE EXTENT AS RECOGNISED BY SECTION 306 OF THE INDIAN SUCCESSION ACT, THAT IS, THE CLAIM ON ACCOUNT OF LOSS TO THE ESTATE OF THE DECEASED.

S.K. Dubey, J.

1. This is an appeal against the award dated 13.8.1991 passed in Motor Accident Claim Case No. 4 of 1990 by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Harda.

2. The facts giving rise to this appeal are thus:

The claimant (since deceased) aged 70 years, was going on his scooter on 22.9.1989 in the market of Harda town. At about 12.30, newly bought Swaraj tractor, driven by respondent No. 3, owned by respondent Nos. 1 and 2 and insured with respondent No. 4 hit the scooterist as a result of which he fell down and received multiple severe injuries. First information report was lodged at the police station, Harda. The investigating agency prepared the spot-map and sent the injured for medical examination. The driver of the tractor was arrested, who, later on, was released on bail. The tractor was seized which was also given on supuradnama after its mechanical examination to the owner. The injured was shifted to Hamidia Hospital, Bhopal, where he remained as an indoor patient from 23.9.1989 to 28.9.1989 and was treated for fracture of 4th, 5th and 7th rib of left side and also for fracture of left shoulder, left clavicle and left neck humerus. He was operated for close reduction under general anaesthesia. He was advised weekly check-up. The injury report, X-ray and discharge certificate were produced and proved.

3. The injured claimed compensation of Rs. 75,000. The claim was contested. The defence was that there was no accident with the tractor. The claimant examined himself and one eyewitness Sharad Kumar to prove the accident. Dr. Vinay Singh Mourya, Assistant Surgeon proved the injuries and treatment. Respondent No. 1, the owner, Raghuvirsingh examined himself, who stated that there was no accident with his tractor. However, the driver, Jaswant Singh, who was driving the tractor, did not appear in the witness-box. The Tribunal after appreciation of the evidence dismissed the claim, holding that the claimant has failed to establish that the accident was caused by the tractor.

4. The claimant aggrieved of this award filed an appeal, who died during pendency of the appeal. His legal representatives were substituted on record.

5. Mr. A.N. Choubey, learned Counsel for the appellants, Mr. Abhay Gupta for respondent Nos. 1 and 3 and Mrs. Indira Nair for respondent No. 4 heard.

6. First, we will take up the objection raised by the learned Counsel for the respondents about the continuance of the appeal by the legal representatives of the injured claimant (since deceased), based on doctrine of action personalist moritur cum persona, that is, a personal claim dies with the person (claimant). It is a common law doctrine. It was a rule of common law that a personal claim dies with the person, that is, if an injury is done either to the person or property of another for which the damages could only be recovered in satisfaction, the action dies with the person to whom or by whom the wrong was done; but the maxim has no application where the right to claim compensation for the injuries suffered can be claimed under a statutory provision. The statutory provisions are contained in Section 165 to 175 of Chapter XII of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short 'the Act') corresponding to Sections 110 to 110F of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (for short 'Act of 1939') repealed by the Act. Section 166 of the Act deals with the application for compensation. Clause (a) of Sub-section (1) of Section 166 of the Act enables the application for compensation being made in a Claims Tribunal under the Act, whereby a person, who has sustained injury can claim. Clause (b) relates to the claim application by the owner of the property. Clause (c) enables the application for compensation being made before the Tribunal where the death has resulted in a motor accident. Such application can be made either by all the legal representatives of the deceased or by any of them. Clause (d) enables the agent duly authorised by the person injured or all or any of the l