TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2007 (3) TMI 836
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....red to as the 'deceased') could maintain a claim petition in terms of Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (in short the 'Act') she was not entitled to any compensation as she was not dependant upon the deceased. 3. Factual position is undisputed and needs a brief reference. On 11.5.1998 deceased lost his life in a vehicular accident and the offending vehicle, a Mini Truck registration No.WB-29/0185 belonged to respondent No. 2. As the deceased had no other legal heir, a claim petition was lodged claiming compensation. Respondent No. 1 (hereinafter referred to as the 'insurer') with whom the offending vehicle was the subject- matter of insurance filed a written statement taking the stand that since the claim....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hat a realistic and pragmatic view should be taken. Learned Counsel for the insurer supported the judgment of the Tribunal and the High Court. 6. Section 166 of the Act corresponds to Section 110 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Old Act') and the same reads as follows: Application for compensation: (1) An application for compensation arising out of an accident of the nature specified in Sub-section (1) of Section 165 may be made- (a) by the person who has sustained the injury; or (b) by the owner of the property; or (c) where death has resulted from the accident, by all or any of the legal representatives of the deceased; or (d) by any agent duly authorized by the person injured or all or ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... to said sub-section makes the position clear that where all the legal representatives had not joined, then application can be made on behalf of the legal representatives of the deceased by impleading those legal representatives as respondents. Therefore, the High Court was justified in its view that the appellant could maintain a claim petition in terms of Section 166 of the Act. 7. Section 168 of the Act reads as follows: Award of the Claims Tribunal: On receipt of an application for compensation made under Section 166, the Claims Tribunal shall, after giving notice of the application to the insurer and after giving the parties (including the insurer) an opportunity of being heard, hold an inquiry into the claim or, as the case may be,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of compensation by a person who claims for the same. 9. According to Section 2(11) of CPC, "legal representative" means a person who in law represents the estate of a deceased person, and includes any person who intermeddles with the estate of the deceased and where a party sues or is sued in a representative character the person on whom the estate devolves on the death of the party so suing or sued. Almost in similar terms is the definition of legal representative under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, i.e. under Section 2(1)(g). 10. As observed by this Court in Custodian of Branches of BANCO National Ultramarino v. Nalini Bai Naique [1989] 2 SCR 810 the definition contained in Section 2(11) CPC is inclusive in character and i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e of absence of dependency. Section 165 of the Act also throws some light on the controversy. The explanation includes the liability under Sections 140 and 163A. 12. Judged in that background where a legal representative who is not dependant files an application for compensation, the quantum cannot be less than the liability referable to Section 140 of the Act. Therefore, even if there is no loss of dependency the claimant if he or she is a legal representative will be entitled to compensation, the quantum of which shall be not less than the liability flowing from Section 140 of the Act. The appeal is allowed to the aforesaid extent. There will be no order as to costs. We record our appreciation for the able assistance rendered by Shri Jay....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ly drawn a distinction between "right to apply for compensation" and "entitlement to compensation". The High Court has rightly held that even a married daughter is a legal representative and she is certainly entitled to claim compensation. It was further held, on the facts of the present case, that the married daughter was not dependent on her father. She was living with her husband in her husband's house. Therefore, she was not entitled to claim statutory compensation. According to the High Court, the claimant was not dependent on her father's income. Hence, she was not entitled to claim compensation based on "No Fault Liability". 17. In my opinion, "No Fault Liability", envisaged in Section 140 of the said Act, is distinguishable....