t{ * % IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date ofJudgment: I 3.1' 0.201 I + MAC Appeal No. 623/2O1O SH. SOHAN PAL & ANR. ..APPellants Through: Mr. Navneet Goyal, Advocate. Versus IFFCO TOKIO GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. Through: .......ResPondent Ms. Suman Bagga, Advocate. a t CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET I(AUR 1. Whether the Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? Yes 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Yes (OraI) For order see MAC APPEAL No.622l2010. ocToBER 13, 20tI rb MAC Appeal No. 623/2010 Page I of 1 It" I l Ir EET KAUR, J. INDERM Digitally Signed By:AMULYA Certify that the digital file and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file and no page is missing. Signature Not Verified ' ,lf ,iq'ir,W -,.;,;ll,: ,J p q-oi6: :|< o/o IN THE HIGII COURT SOHAN PAL & ANR. Throrigh: OF DELHI AT NEW DEI,HI Date ofJudgment:' L 3' 1 0'201 1 ...APPellants Mr. Navneet GoYal, Advocate' ..ResPond'ent Ms.Suman Bagga, Advocate' allowed to Page t ol'3 + SH. Versus IFFCO TOKIO GENERAL INSUNANCE CO. LTD. Through: CORAM: iorvGrn Ms. JUsrrcE TNDERMEET KAUR' l.WhetherLheReportersofiocalpapersmayb'e see the judgment? 2. Tobe referrect to the Reporter or not? Yes 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Yes . (Oral) l.Tlresearethreeappealsw]richhadbeenfilerlbythein-Iaws i.e.father.-in-lawandmother-in.lawofd.eceasedRuchiandtlr.e grarrdparentsofthed'ecea.sed.minorchild'renAyushanclKritika' Their claj.ms had been'dismissed by tlr'e }earned Tribunal vide irnpugnedAwarcldated'09'06'2010;theTribunalwasoftheview V MAC Appeal Nos. 622120 tO, 623t2OrO and 658/201 0 -;--1 ".fj,;', lli{r .r .i j. "+, 'r I llj lil iil tY,,ff.fV,, t INDERMEET-KASB ,v4 n''al tT- Lhat the claimants were not entitled to any compensation as they were not dependent upoir the deceased. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reiiance upon a judgment of this court reported,tn III 2003) ACC 140 titled as Corporation and Anr. to support his submission that a claim of the father-in-iaw qua the death of daughter-in-law would fit into the claim filed by the legal representatives and in the aforenoted case, the court had awarded compensation to the father-in-Iaw of the deceased daughter-in-law., Reliance has also been placed upon I(1987) ACC 475 titled as Gu-iarat State Road Transpor! Corporation vs. Ramanbhai Prabltatbhai & Anr. to support his submission that a cldim seeking compensation for the death of a person, may b.e filed not only by the legal representatives of the deceasect but also by any agent cluly authorisei by all or any of the legal represent'atives. Attention has beeri drawn to the definition of the "legal representatives" as contained.in the said judgment. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner stated that id these circumstances, the matter should be remanded back to t}e Tribunal to determine the quantum of compensation, if any, which would be due to the claimants. MAC Appeal Nos. 6221201.0, 6231201.0 and 658/20L0 Page 2 oF3 /8 r. 'ra 4. Learned counsel for the respondent has not disputed the proposition of law as laid down in the aforenoted judgments. 5. These appeals are accordingly remanded back to the learned Tribunal to determine if the claimants in the instant case i.e. granclparents of d.eceased Ayush and Kritika and in laws of deceasecl Ruchi rvould be entitled to compensation in lieu of the evidence which has already been led by them. If so required, the partics will be permitted to'lead further evidence also' Matter is accordingly remanded back to the District Judge, Rohini who shall assign these appeals to the concerned MACT Court at Rohini' For the said purpose, partl.es are d"ir:ected" to appear before the District Judge, Rohini on 03.11".20L1 at 10.30 pm. 6. With these directions, these appeals are disppsed of. l I gdv OCTOBER rb L3, 20LL INDERMEET KAtrJR, J. {c0,4\ MAC Appeal Nos. 622120I0,623120L0 and 658120La Page 3 of'3