LAWS(DLH)-1987-3-74

HARA SINGH Vs. MEWA RAM SINGH

Decided On March 13, 1987
HARA SINGH Appellant
V/S
MEWA RAM SINGH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal for enhancement of compensation arises out of the claim petition filed by Hara Singh and his wife Ram Rakhi on the death of their son Jang Bahadur who died in a road accident on 30.10.1972. The claimants had claimed Rs. 1,00,000.00 as compensation. However, the Tribunal has awarded only Rs. 14,600.00. During the pendency of the petition before the Tribunal Ram Rakhi died and her legal heirs were brought on record.

(2.) The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal held that only those legal heirs who are recognised by the Hindu Succession Act will be entitled to get the compensation. The Tribunal then held that mother was a class I heir and, therefore, excluded father who is not a class I. heir. No compensation was awarded to the father.

(3.) The Tribunal has gravely erred in misreading the Division Bench judgment of this court reported in Dewan Hari Chand v. Municipal Committee of Delhi, 1981 ACJ 131 (Delhi). In that case, the father, the brothers and the sisters of the deceased had claimed compensation. The Division Bench restricted the compensation to father alone and held that brothers and sisters were not entitled to any compensation. The Division Bench relied upon the definition of the claimants under the Fatal Accidents Act which includes father and mother but not the brothers and sisters. Apart from this error the Tribunal ignored that section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act talks of legal representatives and not legal heirs. Although the term 'legal representative' has not been defined in the Motor Vehicles Act, the definition in the Fatal Accidents Act makes the position clear. The Tribunal, therefore, erred in holding that the Hindu Succession Act is applicable for deciding as to who should get compensation, under the Motor Vehicles Act. The part of the judgment of the Tribunal which holds father as not being entitled for compensation has, therefore, to be set aside. Both mother and father were entitled for compensation under section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act.