KALLIDUKKIL CHERIYAKUTTY MAMMI Vs. THONIYADATH UMMER KUTTY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellants are the brother and two sisters of one Khadeesa Urnma who died in a motor accident on 5-6-1984. She was married but had no children. Her husband made a claim for compensation before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (for short 'Claims Tribunal, While the claim was pending adjudication appellants got themselves impleaded in the claim proceedings as respondents. Claims Tribunal passed an award in the said proceedings against the driver and owner of the motor vehicle which was involved in the accident and mulcted the insurance company with liability under the award. Claims Tribunal, however, apportioned the awarded sum (Rs. 86,000/ -) in the ratio of 2: 1 and allotted the larger portion to the husband and the smaller portion to the siblings of the deceased (appellants). This appeal is in challenge of the ratio adopted for such apportionment.

(2.) Appellants contend now that under Mohammedan Law the husband of a Muslim lady (who died childless) would be entitled only to one half share of the estate of the deceased and the other half would go to her siblings and hence the Claims Tribunal should have allotted one half of the awarded amount to the appellants.

(3.) The above contention is advanced on the strength of S.166(1)(c) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short 'the Act') which enables the legal representatives of the deceased to apply for compensation. Though the Act does not contain any definition for the words "legal representatives of the deceased", Rule 2(k) of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 contains a definition for that expression as persons "who in law are entitled to inherit the estate of the deceased if he had left any estate at the time of his death and includes any legal heir of the deceased and the executor or administrator of the estate of the deceased.