New India Assurance Com. Vs Guddi alias Pushpa and Ors. CMP(M) No. 1807 of 2024 17.07.2025 Present: Mr. Raman Sethi, Advocate for the applicant/ appellant. Mr. Maan Singh, Advocate, for respondents No. 1 to 3. Respondent No.4 is stated to have expired on 10.06.2019 Respondents No. 5 and 6 ex-parte vide order dated 21.03.2025 CMP(M) No. 1807 of 2024 Power of attorney on behalf of respondent No.3 has not been filed. Be filed well before next date of hearing. CMP(M) Nos. 1201 and 1202 of 2025 These applications have been filed for substitution of deceased respondent No.4 Surti Devi, who is stated to have expired on 10.06.2019 i.e. during pendency of the claim petition before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-II Kullu, District Kullu. The claim petition was preferred on 4.06.2026 and the award has been passed on 3.6.2024. Surti Devi was claimant No.4 before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal. In aforesaid facts and circumstances, learned counsel for the applicant/appellant has also submitted that on account of death of Surti Devi during pendency of the claim petition and in absence of her substitution, claim petition should have been treated to be abated. Proceedings under Motor Vehicles Act before MACT are in nature of summary proceedings for which procedure has been prescribed in the Motor Vehicle Act as well as Rules framed thereunder. Section 169 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 reads as under:- “169. Procedure and powers of Claims Tribunals.- (1) In holding any inquiry under section 168, the Claims Tribunal may, subject to any rules that may be made in this behalf, follow such summary procedure as it thinks fit. (2) The Claims Tribunal shall have all the powers of a Civil Court for the purpose of taking evidence on oath and of enforcing the attendance of witnesses and of compelling the discovery and production of documents and material objects and for such other purposes as may be prescribed; and the Claims Tribunal shall be deemed to be a Civil Court for all the purposes of section 195 and Chapter XXVI of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974). (3) Subject to any rules that may be made in this behalf, the Claims Tribunal may, for the purpose of adjudicating upon any claim for compensation, choose one or more persons possessing special knowledge of any matter relevant to the inquiry to assist it in holding the inquiry. (4) For the purpose of enforcement of its award, the Claims Tribunal shall also have all the powers of a Civil Court in the execution of a decree under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, as if the award were a decree for the payment of money passed by such court in a civil suit.]” Rules 232 and 233 of the H.P. Motor Vehicle Rules, 1999, read as under:- “232. The Code of Civil Procedure to apply in certain cases:- The following provisions of the First Schedule to the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 shall so far as may be, apply to proceedings before the Claims Tribunal, namely, Order V, Rules 9 to 13 and 15 to 30; Order IX ; Order XIII ; Rule 3 to 10; Order XVI, Rules 2 to 21 ;Order XVII ; Order XXI and Order XXIII, Rules 1 to 3. 233. Form and manner of appeals against the award of Claims Tribunal :- (1) Every appeal under sub-section 173 of the Act against the award of a Claims Tribunal shall be preferred in the form of a memorandum stating concisely the grounds on which the appeal is preferred, and shall be accompanied by a copy of the judgment and the award appealed against. (2) The provisions of Order 41, Rules 22 and 33 of the code of Civil Procedure, 1908, shall, so far as may be, apply to the appeals failed under the Act.” Section 169(1) of the Motor Vehicle Act empowers the MACT, though subject to any Rules that may be made in this regard, to follow such summary procedure as it thinks fit. Therefore, subject to provisions of the MV Act as well as Rules made thereunder, MACT is competent to evolve its procedure. In Section 169 itself, there is reference of application of certain provisions of Code of Civil Procedure in certain situations and to empower the MACT to conduct inquiry in a Claim Petition and to adjudicate and decide the same by following such summary procedure as it deemed fit. Rule 232 and and 233 of H.P. Motor Vehicles Rules also specify the provisions of Code of Civil Procedure which are applicable in the proceedings before the MACT. From the aforesaid provisions, it is unambiguous that application of provisions of Code of Civil Procedure has been made to a limited extent to the proceedings under M.V. Act before MACT. Therefore, there is implied implicit exclusion of all provisions of Code of Civil Procedure, except those which are mentioned either in Section 169 of Motor Vehicles Act or Rules made thereunder including the H.P. Motor Vehicles Rules. In the aforesaid circumstances, I am of the considered opinion that rigors of Order 22 of the Code of Civil Procedure shall not be applicable to the proceedings before the MACT. However, for the purpose of conducting and completing the proceedings General Principle of Civil Law including principles of natural justice and principles contained in provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure shall be applicable, and in case of death of a party even though proceedings may not abate automatically on account of death of a party, but the process, procedure and consequences of addition, deletion or non-impleadment of necessary and/or proper parties shall have applicability in the proceedings before the MACT and the party failing in taking such steps shall suffer the consequences thereof if have any impact on the rights of such defaulter party. However, keeping in view nature of beneficial provisions and intent of the Legislature to enact the same, addition, deletion, and/or substitution can be permitted in appropriate case at any stage, including the appeal. However, keeping in view provisions of MV Act and Rules made thereunder, there shall be no abatement in terms of order 22 of the Code of Civil Procedure in the proceedings before MACT, the necessary party/legal heirs/legal representatives of deceased party can be brought on record any stage but subject to considering consequences thereof and in appropriate cases there may be necessity to refer/remand the cases to the MACT for further adjudication to ensure opportunity of being heard to be granted to the legal heirs/legal representatives of deceased party and there may be cases in the given facts and circumstances of such matter where there shall be no necessity to remand or refer the matters to the MACT for fresh adjudication, by giving opportunity of being heard to the legal heirs or legal representatives of a deceased party in appeal itself. Legal heirs/legal representatives, subject to demonstration of necessity on account of proceedings in their absence before MACT, may also have option either to pray for remand or to adjudicate the matter at appellate stage after arraying them as party. In the present matter though neither death certificate nor legal heir certificate of deceased Surti Devi has been placed on record. The applicant /insurance company has placed on record alongwith application an investigation report conducted by investigator engaged by the applicant company. Whereas date of death of Surti Devi have been stated as 10.06.2019, with the details of her legal heirs mentioned in the report. The proposed respondents are in consonance with the details of legal heirs mentioned in the investigation report. In this list of legal heirs Guddi Devi, Avantika Kumari and Prithvi Thakur are already on record as respondents No. 1 to 3, and one Veer Singh and one Champa Devi, son and daughter of Surti Devi havealso been mentioned as proposed respondents being legal heirs of Surti Devi. Veer Singh and Champa Devi are brother and sister of late Tara Chand. They were not original claimants because they were not dependent on late Tara Chand. Surti Devi had expired prior to passing of the award. Three of her legal heirs are already claimants as dependents on deceased Tara Chand. The amount of compensation has been awarded on account of death of deceased Tara Chand. Therefore, I am of the considered view that in any eventuality, for existence of dependent legal representatives/ legal heirs of deceased Tara Chand, his brother Veer Singh and Champa Devi cannot be held entitled for any compensation on account of death of Tara Chand. Therefore, Veer Singh and Champa Devi are not necessary party to be impleaded. I am of the considered opinion that in a Claim Petition under the Motor Vehicles Act or any other such similar beneficial Act where claim is filed by the claimants on the basis of their individual right of dependency on the deceased, on death of one or more such claimants, the amount of compensation at the first instance has to devolve upon the other claimants, certainly in all such cases where amount of compensation has not been determined yet at the time of death of such original claimant, unless person, intending to or intended to be made party in substitution of deceased claimants, demonstrates and establishes his right to receive compensation on account of death of deceased victim for whose death Claim Petition has been preferred. Even in those cases where amount has been determined, awarded and even disbursed to parent claimant, but has not been spent by parent claimant, the same should be reverted back to surviving claimants or their legal heirs but not to all legal heirs of parent(s). In absence of other claimants amount of compensation payable to parent(s) may be awarded/disbursed/remitted to surviving legal heirs of parent after his/her death. Principle of reversion of estate/property to original source is not unknown to law. Reference in this regard may be made to such provision contained in Section 15 of the Hindu Succession Act, which read as under:- “15. General rules of succession in the case of female Hindus. ― (1) The property of a female Hindu dying intestate shall devolve according to the rules set out in section 16,― (a) firstly, upon the sons and daughters (including the children of any pre-deceased deceased son or daughter) and the husband; (b) secondly, upon the heirs pf the husband; (c) thirdly, upon the mother and father; (d) fourthly, upon the heirs of the father; and (e) lastly, upon the heirs of the mother . (2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub- section (1),― (a) any property inherited by a female Hindu from her father or mother shall devolve, in the absence of any son or daughter of the deceased (including the children of any pre- deceased son or daughter) not upon the other heirs referred in sub-section (1) in the order specified therein, but upon the heirs of the father; and (b) any property inherited by a female Hindu from her husband or from her father-in-law shall devolve, in the absence of any son or daughter of the deceased (including the children of any pre-deceased son or daughter) not upon the other heirs referred to in sub-section (1) in the order specified therein, but upon the heirs of the husband.” Section 15(2) of Hindu Succession Act, in absence of persons eligible to inherit the property, provides reversion of property to the original source of property. In claim cases, like present one, where persons proposed to be brought on record were and are not otherwise eligible to receive compensation for death of deceased victim Tara Chand, the compensation falling in or likely to fall in the share of parent(s) has to be reverted to surviving original claimants. In absence of original claimants, it may devolve upon natural legal heirs of deceased parent(s). In normal circumstances, those who were and are not dependent upon deceased victim, may not be entitled for share in compensation as other dependents legal representatives/legal heirs of deceased Tara Chand are already on record. There may be cases where widow and/or children of deceased may not be enjoying cordial relations with and supportive role of brothers, sisters of deceased or other legal heirs of parent of deceased/victim. In such cases awarding and disbursing compensation to such brother, sister or persons shall result miscarriage of justice causing unwarranted punishment to actual claimants. In Claim Petition, like present one, either under MACT or Employees Compensation Act or any other similar enactment or statute, where parent(s) is or are also claimants and entitled for compensation on account of death of son/daughter, and children and wife of deceased persons are also claimants and entitled for compensation awarded or to be awarded, the compensation awarded or to be awarded in favour of parent(s), on death of parent(s) has not to be disbursed amongst all legal heirs of parent(s), but has to be disbursed amongst surviving legal heirs/representatives of deceased person for whose death compensation is awarded. Because in such claim cases, compensation is awarded on account of dependency upon the deceased. It is not a property or estate inherited by the parent(s) including mother by way of succession or otherwise but is a compensation awarded being dependent legal heirs/representatives of deceased person. Therefore, in such cases, subject to availability of Class-1 legal heirs of deceased-victim, amount of compensation, fallen in share of parent(s) of deceased-victim, is to be disbursed amongst eligible Class-1 legal heirs of deceased-victim on account of whose death compensation is determined and awarded, but not to the Class-1 legal heirs/representatives of deceased claimant parent(s). Parents are claimants in such cases, being dependent on their deceased child, which impliedly means that other children were not looking after them and, therefore, the compensation, is awarded to such parent(s). On death of parent(s), other children of such parent(s) do not deserve any payment of amount out of the compensation payable or paid or awarded. to parent(s) on account of their brother or sister, whose eligible Class-1 legal heirs/legal representatives are already available for disbursement/payment of such compensation amount. Therefore, I am of the considered opinion that amount of compensation awarded to the parent(s), if not disbursed to and/or utilized by parent(s), has to be remitted back to eligible Class-1legal heirs/representatives of deceased victim for whose death compensation has been awarded. In present case Tara Chand died before passing of award. Therefore, amount of compensation has to be apportioned amongst the surviving dependents of deceased Surti Devi and thus share in amount of compensation awarded in favourof Surti Devi has to be disbursed/apportioned amongst surviving claimants, who are wife and children of deceased Tara Chand. In view of aforesaid discussion, I am of the considered opinion that neither Claim Petition has abated before the MACT nor death of one claimant Surti Devi has any impact on either party, much less adverse impact. Further that proposed persons excep surviving claimants are neither necessary party to litigation nor entitled or required to be brought on record for adjudication of Claim Petition before the MACT, or in present appeal, and now only name of Surti Devi has to be deleted, and amount of compensation awarded to the share of Surti Devi is to be disbursed amongst surviving eligible/dependent Class-1 legal heris/representatives of deceased Tara Chand. Therefore, as the surviving claimants are already on record, prayer for her substitution Veer Singh and Champa as a party is rejected and the name of Surti Devi is ordered to be deleted from the array of the parties. Applications are disposed of in the aforesaid terms. CMP(M) No. 1807 of 2024 Considering averments made in the application submissions made by learned counsel for contesting parties delay in filing the appeal is condoned. Application is allowed and disposed of. FAO No. __________of 2025 (ST No. 40336/24) Be registered. Admit. Fresh amended memo of parties in terms of order passed in aforesaid applications No. CMP(M) No. 1201 and 1202 of 2025 be filed within one week. Post admission notices returnable on next date of hearing, on taking steps within a week, be issued to respondents No.5 and 6. Records be requisitioned. List for further orders on 15.09.2025. July 17, 2025 (Vivek Singh Thakur) (g.m) Judge