CHUHARMAL Vs. WALI MOHAMMAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal against an order dated 30.11.1965 whereby the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Bhopal, dismissed an application for compensation in respect of the death of one Ranwaldas as a result of an accident which ensued when the respondent 2 was driving a motor vehicle owned by the respondent 1 and insured by the respondent 3.

(2.) THE Tribunal held that the application made by Chuharmal (father) alone and not also by Smt. Sadoribai (mother) was incompetent, that on the death of Smt. Sadoribai, her legal representatives had no right to continue the application and that in any event, the application made by them for being brought on record was out of time and state.

(3.) ADMITTEDLY , the provisions relating to abatement contained in Order 22 of the Code of Civil Procedure have no application to these proceedings. That being so, the legal representatives of Smt. Sadoribai can be brought on record at any time during the pendency of the proceedings. Indeed, claims made in such cases are always in a representative character and no question of abatement on account of failure to bring the legal representatives on record within the prescribed time can arise. For principle, we may refer to State of Rajasthan vs. Parwati Devi, ILR 1966 Rajasthan 148=1966 ACJ 123=AIR 1966 Rajasthan 210. In that case, a widow filed a suit for compensation for the death of her husband caused by injuries sustained in a motor accident. The suit was decreed. The defendant filed an appeal. During the pendency of the appeal, the widow, who was the only respondent, died. The appellant did not implead the legal representatives in time. It was contended that the appeal had abated. The Division Bench observed: -