Advocates:
ABHIJIT SENGUPTAPRAVIR CHOUDHARY

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Page 1 of 4

CASE NO.:

Appeal (civil) 3216 of 2007

PETITIONER:

Mrs. Hafizun Begum

RESPONDENT:

Md. Ikram Heque and Ors

DATE OF JUDGMENT: 24/07/2007

BENCH:

Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT & D.K. JAIN

JUDGMENT:

J U D G M E N T

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 3216 OF 2007

(Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 15012 of 2005)

Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J.

1. Leave granted.

2. An interesting question has been raised in this appeal

about the acceptability of claim for grant of compensation

when the relatives are legal heirs but are not dependants of

the deceased, before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,

Darrang, Mangaldoi (in short "Tribunal").

3. Appellant claimed to be the wife of one Md. Nurul Hoque.

She assailed the validity of the order dated 30.5.2005 in

Petition No.382/2005 filed by the brothers of aforesaid Md.

Nurul Hoque (hereinafter referred to as the ’deceased’) in MAC

Case No.139/2001 filed under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988

(in short the ’Act’).

4. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the

brothers of the deceased did not depend on him and they had

no right to file a petition which was allowed. The High Court

found that the widow of a Muslim who has no issue will get

one fourth share in the property of the deceased-husband and

remaining part will go to the brothers. Question was about

the right of the brothers who were not dependants on the

deceased to get their share in the compensation awarded.

Accordingly, the appeal was dismissed.

5. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the

High Court was not justified in rejecting the stand of the

appellant. Learned counsel for the respondents, however,

supported the order.

6. Even if there was no dependence, there is a loss to the

estate and a person who is a legal representative but not

dependant can yet be a beneficiary of the estate. It was,

therefore, submitted that a realistic and pragmatic view

should be taken.

7. Section 166 of the Act corresponds to Section 110 of the

Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (hereinafter referred to as the ’Old

Act’) and the same reads as follows:

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Page 2 of 4

"Application for compensation:- (1) An

application for compensation arising out of

an accident of the nature specified in sub-

section (1) of Section 165 may be made-

(a) by the person who has sustained the

injury; or

(b) by the owner of the property; or

(c) where death has resulted from the

accident, by all or any of the legal

representatives of the deceased; or

(d) by any agent duly authorized by the

person injured or all or any of the legal

representatives of the deceased, as the case

may be.

Provided that where all the legal

representatives of the deceased have not

joined in any such application for

compensation, the application shall be made

on behalf of or for the benefit of all the legal

representatives of the deceased and the

legal representatives who have not so joined,

shall be impleaded as respondents to the

application.

(2) Every application under sub-section

(1) shall be made, at the option of the

claimant, either to the Claims Tribunal

having jurisdiction over the area in which

the accident occurred or to the Claims

Tribunal within the local limits of whose

jurisdiction the claimant resides or carries

on business or within the local limits of

whose jurisdiction the defendant resides,

and shall be in such form and contain such

particulars as may be prescribed:

Provided that where no claim for

compensation under Section 140 is made in

such application, the application shall

contain a separate statement to that effect

immediately before the signature of the

applicant.

xx xx xx

(4) The Claims Tribunal shall treat any

report of accidents forwarded to it under

sub-section (6) of Section 158 as an

application for compensation under t