GUDDI Vs. PHOOL SINGH & ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Appellant who is legal representative of the deceased Ram Bati being her daughter seeks enhancement of compensation of Rs. 80,000/ - awarded for her death.

(2.) IT is urged by the learned counsel for the Appellant that for a claim of compensation, the Claimant need not necessarily be financially dependent on the deceased and the legal representatives are entitled to compensation under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act. Reliance is placed on a judgment of Madhya Pradesh High Court in Gajanand & Ors. v. Virendra Singh & Ors., : 2010 ACJ 145, wherein it was held as under:

(3.) IN Manjuri Bera (Smt.) v. Oriental Insurance Company Limited & Anr. : (2007) 10 SCC 643, the question of award of compensation for death of a married daughter came up for consideration before the Calcutta High Court. The Claim Petition filed by the deceased's mother was dismissed by the Tribunal as also by the Calcutta High Court on the ground that there was no loss of dependency. The Supreme Court referred to the term "legal representative", as used under Section 168 of the Motor Vehicles Act (the Act) with reference to its definition under Section 2(11) of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) and held that the definition of "legal representative" as contained in Section 2(11) CPC is applicable to the Act and is inclusive in character, its scope is wide and is not confined to legal heirs only. The Supreme Court referred to Custodian of Branches of BANCO National Ultramarino v. Nalini Bai Naique, : 1989 Supp. (2) SCC 275 and held that the legal representatives are entitled to the statutory compensation payable under Section 140 of the Act. Para 13 to 15 of the report are extracted hereunder: -