2025:HHC:18261 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CMP(M) No. 179 of 2025 in FAO No. 33 of 2025 R eserved on: 6.6.2025 Date of decision: 16 .6 .202 5 Umesh Kumar & others. ….Applicants/Appellants. Versus Leela Devi & others. ….Non-applicants/Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Vivek Singh Thakur, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 Yes. For the Applicants : Mr.Bimal Gupta, Senior Advocate, alongwith Mr.Trigun Singh Negi, Advocate, vice Ms.Kusum Chaudhary, Advocate, for appellants and for proposed appellants No. 5(i) & 5(ii) For the Respondents: Mr.Rupinder S. Minhas, Advocate, for respondents No. 1 & 3 to 7. Respondent No. 2 already ex parte vide order dated 15th May, 2025. Mr.Bhupinder Pathania, Advocate, for respondent No. 8. Vivek Singh Thakur, Judge This application has been filed for bringing on record legal representatives of Neem Devi alias Neem Dassi, who was claimant No. 5 in the Claim Petition No. 4 of 2019 before the MACT-II, Kullu. 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? Yes 2025:HHC:18261 CMP (M) Nos. 179 of 2025 2. The Claim Petition was filed on 19.9.2018 and final award was passed on 23.9.2024. Neem Devi alias Neem Devi had expired on 1.1.2024, i.e. prior to passing of final award. It is also admitted fact that she had expired prior to addressing final arguments in the Claim Petition. 3. It has been submitted on behalf of respondents that on account of death of claimant No. 5 Neem Devi alias Neem Dassi before addressing arguments in the Claim Petition, the Claim Petition has to suffer consequences as provided under Order 22 of the Code of Civil Procedure and, therefore, for determining the impact of death of Neem Devi alias Neem Dassi during pendency of MACT and for not taking appropriate steps before MACT on account of her death either for her deletion or substitution, main appeal is required to be remanded back to the MACT for determining the impact of death of claimant No. 5 and also for adjudication of application, if any, was or is preferred for substitution/deletion of deceased Neem Davi alias Neem Dassi. 4. 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. 5. 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 2 2025:HHC:18261 CMP (M) Nos. 179 of 2025 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.]” 6. 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 3 2025:HHC:18261 CMP (M) Nos. 179 of 2025 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.” 7. 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. 8. Rules 232 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. 9. 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 4 2025:HHC:18261 CMP (M) Nos. 179 of 2025 of Motor Vehicles Act or Rules made thereunder including the H.P. Motor Vehicles Rules. 10. 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. 11. 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 5 2025:HHC:18261 CMP (M) Nos. 179 of 2025 on record at 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. 12. In present case, Claim Petition before MACT was preferred by dependent legal heirs/representatives of deceased Tikam Ram on account of his death in a motor accident. 13. Neem Devi alias Neem Dassi was claimant before the MACT being mother of deceased Tikam Ram and other claimants are wife and children of deceased Tikam Ram. 14. In this application prayer has been made to substitute Neem Devi alias Neem Dassi through her legal representatives Surat Ram and Babita. 6 2025:HHC:18261 CMP (M) Nos. 179 of 2025 15. Legal representatives of Neem Devi alias Neem Dassi, proposed to be brought on record in substitution, are not dependent-legal representatives of deceased Tikam Ram, but Surat Ram is other son of Neem Devi alias Neem Dassi who is brother of Tikam Ram, and Babita is married daughter of per-deceased son of Neem Davi alias Neem Dassi, who is married to one Alam Chand. 16 At the time of filing claim petition, Neem Devi alias Neem Dassi was arrayed as claimant being mother of deceased Tikam Ram. None of brothers of Tikam Ram or their children as well as Babita were dependent legal heirs/representatives of deceased Tikam Ram and thus, no one of them was eligible and entitled to claim compensation on account of death of deceased Tikam Ram. 17. It has neither been reflected in the application nor counsel appearing for the appellants is able to inform that who is father of Babita, whether she is daughter of Tikam Ram or some other predeceased son of Neem Devi alias Neem Devi alias Neem Dassi. However, for purpose of adjudication of the this application this information may not be necessary because whether she is daughter of Tikkam Ram or any other predeceased son of Neem Devi alias Neem Dassi, she was not dependent legal representative of deceased Tikam Ram at the time of filing claim petition. Be that as it may. In case she is daughter of Tikam Ram, then being married daughter, and in case she is daughter of some 7 2025:HHC:18261 CMP (M) Nos. 179 of 2025 other son, being daughter of non dependent brother upon deceased Tikam Ram, she was and is not entitled to claim compensation on account of death of deceased Tikam Ram. 18. At this stage, it would be necessary to clarify that in certain cases in peculiar facts and circumstances, married daughter of deceased victim may also be entitled for compensation like sometime because of dependency and some time as only surviving legal heir where no other eligible recipient is alive or sometime for compensation for loss of consortium. 19. Compensation for loss of consortium under old Section 163A, and now under Section 164, may also be claimed by non- dependent legal heirs. For claiming compensation for loss of consortium, claim has to be put forth by filing petition as claimant at the time of inception of Claim Petition, but not on arraying as legal heir on account of death of original claimant mother or grandmother. 20. In present case Babli has not come forward as original claimant being aggrieved by death of Tikam Ram but as legal heir of grandmother. 21. Therefore, in present case, in any eventuality Surat Ram and Babita were and are not having any right to claim compensation through Neem Dassi on account of death of deceased Tikam Ram. 8 2025:HHC:18261 CMP (M) Nos. 179 of 2025 22. 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. 23. 23. 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. 24. 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:- 9 2025:HHC:18261 CMP (M) Nos. 179 of 2025 “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 son or daughter) and the husband; (b) secondly, upon the heirs of 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.” 25. 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. 26. 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 Tikam Ram, the compensation falling in or likely to fall in the share of mother has to be 10 2025:HHC:18261 CMP (M) Nos. 179 of 2025 reverted to surviving original claimants. In absence of original claimants, it may devolve upon natural legal heirs of deceased mother. 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 Tikam Ram 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. 27. 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 11 2025:HHC:18261 CMP (M) Nos. 179 of 2025 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-1 legal heirs/representatives of deceased victim for whose death compensation has been awarded. 28. In present case Neem Devi alias Neem Dassi died before passing of award. Therefore, amount of compensation has to be 12 2025:HHC:18261 CMP (M) Nos. 179 of 2025 apportioned amongst the surviving dependents of deceased Tikam Ram and thus share of 15% in amount of compensation awarded in favour of Neem Devi alias Neem Dassi has to be disbursed/apportioned amongst surviving claimants/applicants No. 1 to 4, who are wife and children of deceased Tikam Ram. 29. 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 Neem Devi alias Neem Dassi has any impact on either party much less adverse impact. Further that proposed persons 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 Neem Devi @ Neem Dassi has to be deleted, and amount of compensation awarded to the share of Neem Devi alias Neem Dassi is to be disbursed amongst surviving eligible/dependent Class-1 legal heirs/representatives of deceased Tikkam Ram, who are surviving claimants. 30. Accordingly prayer to substitute deceased Neem Devi alias Neem Dassi through Surat Ram and Babita is rejected. The application is disposed of in aforesaid terms. (Vivek Singh Thakur), 16th June, 2025 Judge. (Keshav) 13