J U D G M E N T

(The case has been heard through video conference)

This appeal has been filed challenging the award dated 18.06.2014, passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Chief Judicial Magistrate, Tiruvannamalai in M.C.O.P.No.329 of 2013.

2. The appellant has filed this appeal on the ground that she is the only legal representative of the deceased Ganapathy who died on 10.12.2009, as a result of the accident caused by the vehicle insured with the 4th respondent. But however, according to the appellant, based on the claim petition filed by the respondents 1 and 2, who are the paternal uncle and paternal aunt, impugned award has been passed excluding the appellant from claiming compensation for the death of her father Ganapathy as a result of the accident.

3. In the grounds of appeal, the appellant has also stated that during the pendency of M.C.O.P.No.329 of 2013, the 4th respondent insurance company filed I.A.No.24 of 2013 before the Tribunal seeking to implead the appellant as third respondent in the claim petition. But however, according to the appellant, without serving notice in the said application on the appellant, the Tribunal has set the appellant ex parte and gone