JITENDER KUMAR Vs. ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO PVT LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Petitioners impugn an order dated 08.10.2009 whereby the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (the Claims Tribunal) declined to grant any compensation to the Petitioners out of the compensation awarded to Smt. Sumitra Devi, the Petitioners' mother (since deceased).

(2.) A Claim Petition being Suit No.379/1997 was filed by Respondents No.2 to 4 and one by Smt. Sumitra Devi for the death of Ashok Kumar. Said Ashok Kumar was the husband of Respondent No.2 and the father of Respondents No.3 and 4. He was the son of Late Sumitra Devi, who was the Petitioner No.4 in the original Claim Petition. By a judgment dated 18.08.2000 a compensation of Rs.6,44,000/- was awarded in favour of the Claimants. While apportioning the amount of compensation a sum of Rs.50,000/- was awarded in favour of Smt. Sumitra Devi (now deceased). Respondents No.2 to 4 and said Smt. Sumitra Devi preferred an Appeal being FAO No.465/2000 for enhancement of compensation which came to be decided by this Court by order dated 01.07.2008. The compensation was enhanced from Rs.6,44,000/- to Rs.8,02,000/-. Thus, there was enhancement of Rs.1,58,000/-. The matter was remitted back to the Claims Tribunal for the apportionment of the enhanced compensation in favour of the LRs of deceased Ashok Kumar. At that time, it transpired that Smt. Sumitra Devi had in fact expired during the pendency of the Appeal in this Court. The said fact was, however, not brought to the notice of the Court. The contention was raised by the Petitioners before the Claims Tribunal for the payment of compensation of Rs.50,000/- along with proportionate interest and one-fourth share out of the enhanced compensation of Rs.1,58,000/- to each of the legal heirs. In the impugned order, it was recorded that although the Petitioners (herein) had no objection if the amount of Rs.50,000/- was received by the deceased's widow (Respondent No.2 herein) yet the Petitioners wanted that the share of the enhanced compensation must come to their hands.

(3.) FOR instance, a person may die leaving behind a widow and three children. One of the children may be self-sufficient having independent income. No compensation would be awarded to the said child towards the loss of dependency, although he would be a legal heir and a legal representative representing the estate of the deceased.