Case Note & Summary
The appellants, legal heirs of deceased Bajirao Laxman Thorat, filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ahmednagar, seeking compensation for his death in a vehicular accident on 09.01.2010 involving a Pick Up Van bearing registration No.MH16 Q7867 owned by Dnyaneshwar Kondaji Auti (respondent No.1). During the pendency of the claim petition, the owner died. The claimants failed to bring his legal heirs on record. The Tribunal dismissed the claim petition on that ground and also rejected the application at Exh.48 filed by the claimants seeking leave to bring on record the legal heirs of deceased opponent No.1, which was filed after the judgment was pronounced in open court but before it was signed. The High Court framed two questions: (i) whether failure to bring on record legal heirs of the deceased owner results in dismissal of the claim petition; and (ii) whether the application at Exh.48 was liable to be considered since the judgment was not yet signed. The Court held that the Tribunal erred in dismissing the claim petition solely on the ground of non-substitution, as the claim is against the insurer as well, and the application for substitution should have been considered as it was filed before the judgment was signed. The Court set aside the Tribunal's order and remanded the matter for fresh consideration, allowing the application for substitution and directing the Tribunal to decide the claim petition on merits.
Headnote
A) Motor Accident Claims - Substitution of Legal Heirs - Abatement - Failure to bring on record legal heirs of deceased owner of offending vehicle does not automatically result in dismissal of claim petition; the Tribunal must consider application for substitution if filed before judgment is signed. (Paras 2, 3, 5, 6) B) Motor Accident Claims - Application for Substitution - Timing - An application for bringing legal heirs on record filed after pronouncement of judgment in open court but before the judgment is signed is maintainable and must be considered by the Tribunal. (Paras 2, 5, 6) C) Motor Accident Claims - Section 166 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - Compensation - Claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 cannot be dismissed solely on ground of non-substitution of legal heirs of deceased owner; the Tribunal should allow substitution to secure ends of justice. (Paras 3, 4, 6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether failure to bring on record legal heirs of deceased owner of offending vehicle during pendency of claim petition results in dismissal of the claim petition; and whether an application for substitution filed after pronouncement but before signing of judgment is liable to be considered.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the appeal, set aside the impugned judgment and order dated 02.08.2017 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ahmednagar in Motor Accident Claim Petition No.287 of 2010, and remanded the matter back to the Tribunal for fresh consideration. The application at Exh.48 for bringing on record legal heirs of deceased opponent No.1 is allowed. The Tribunal is directed to decide the claim petition on its own merits in accordance with law, after giving opportunity to both sides.
Law Points
- Motor Accident Claims
- Substitution of Legal Heirs
- Abatement of Proceedings
- Order 22 CPC
- Section 166 Motor Vehicles Act
- 1988
