IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA FAO No. 140 of 2007 Date of decision: 07.07.2010 Urmila Devi and another ... Appellants Versus Charno and others ... Respondents Coram : The Hon’ble Mr. V.K. Ahuja, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the appellants: Mr. Rameshwar Sharma and Ms. Vidushi Sharma, Advocates. For the respondents: Mr. R.S. Kanwar, Advocate, for respondents No. 1 and 2. None for respondents No. 5 and 6. V.K. Ahuja, J. (Oral): This is an appeal filed by the appellant under Section 173 of the Motor vehicles Act against the award of the Court of learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Fast Track Court, Chamba, dated 22.2.2007, vide which the claim petition filed by respondents No. 1 and 2 under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, was allowed and claimants No. 4 and 7 were held entitled to the compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal amounting to Rs.4,38,000/-. No compensation was awarded in favour of respondents No. 5 and 6 and being aggrieved by the said award passed by the learned Tribunal, respondents No. 5 and 6 as appellants, have filed the present appeal. 1Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes. 2 2. A notice of the appeal was issued to the respondents. 3. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record of the case. 4. On appraisal of the facts of the case, it is clear that Smt. Charno, respondent No. 1 and Master Ankuj Kumar, respondent No. 2, filed a petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act for compensation, in regard to the death of Naresh Kumar, husband of Smt. Charno, respondent No. 1 and father of Master Ankuj Kumar, respondent No. 2. During the trial of the petition, an application under Order 1 Rule 10 C.P.C. was also filed by Smt. Sewa Devi, mother of minors Urmila Devi and Sharmila Devi and Man Singh, father of the deceased Naresh Kumar and they also filed an application on behalf of Urmila Devi and Sharmila Devi, appellants, alleging that they were children of the second marriage of deceased Naresh Kumar with Smt. Sewa Devi. They alleged in the application that the children were living with them and they also sought to be impleaded as proforma respondents alongwith the minor daughters from the second marriage. 5. The learned Tribunal awarded the compensation to the extent of Rs.4,38,000/- payable to petitioners No. 1 and 2 and proforma respondents No. 4 and 7 i.e. the parents of the deceased. No compensation was awarded in favour of the present appellants, the alleged daughters from the alleged second marriage. The learned Tribunal has not referred to the evidence in detail in this regard. The facts of the case are that the application was filed by the mother of the applicants and father of the deceased, alleging that the applicants are also minor children from the second wife and are 3 living with them. To substantiate these allegations, the appellants also examined RW-4 Hari Singh, younger brother of deceased Naresh Kumar, who stated that the present applicants are the minor daughters of the deceased and were living presently in the in- law’s house of the deceased. RW-4 was not relied upon by the learned Tribunal in considering the validity of the marriage. The question of validity of the marriage is not to be considered in these proceedings. According to copy of Pariwar Register Ext. RW2/A, the names of both these daughters from the second wife finds mention in the copy of Pariwar Register of Naresh Kumar. The said Pariwar Register has been challenged by the learned counsel for the respondent on the ground that these entries were not made in accordance with law and these are contrary to the copy of Pariwar Register Ext. PD, wherein their names does not figure. The question of validity of the entries made in the Pariwar Register or the validity of the second marriage are not to be considered by this Court, which can be challenged before the Civil Court by respondents No. 1 and 2. However, according to Section 16 of the Hindu Marriage Act, even illegitimate children are also entitled to inherit the property of their father. Accordingly, the applicants as per the evidence were children from the second marriage shown illegitimate but they were also held entitled for the compensation. 6. In view of the above discussion, the findings recorded by the learned Tribunal declining the claim of the claimants/appellants are set aside and they are also held entitled to 1/6th share each of the total compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal including interest. Accordingly, the order passed by the learned Tribunal is amended in regard to the share of the petitioners and other respondents No. 4 4 and 7, namely, Smt. Suti and Man Singh. All these persons shall also be entitled to 1/6th share each out of the total amount alongwith interest. The appeal filed by the appellants is allowed to this extent. Parties are left to bear their own costs. ( V.K. Ahuja ), July 07, 2010 Judge (BSS) 5