IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No. 972 of 2009 Date of decision : February 25, 2010 Salma and others ....Petitioners versus Gulshan and others ....Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice L.N. Mittal Present : Mr. Parminder Singh, Advocate for Mr. Sanjeev Kr. Panwar, Advocate, for the petitioners Mr. Yashpal, Advocate, for respondent nos. 3 and 4 Mr. Subash Goyal, Advocate, for respondent no. 5 None for respondent nos. 1 and 2. L.N. Mittal, J. (Oral) This is revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India impugning order dated 17.12.2008, Annexure P/1, passed by learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Yamuna Nagar at Jagadhri, thereby dismissing application moved by the petitioners under Order 1 Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure for being impleaded as claimants in claim petition filed by respondent nos. 1 and 2 herein under section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, claiming compensation for the death of Mohd. Ishtakar allegedly caused in a motor vehicle accident. Claim petition was filed by widow and both parents of the deceased but father of the deceased withdrew the claim petition which is Civil Revision No. 972 of 2009 -2- now surviving on behalf of widow and mother of the deceased. Petitioners moved application alleging that they are minor unmarried sisters of the deceased and are therefore, also entitled to claim compensation for the death of the deceased along with original claimants. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case file. Under section 166(i)(c) of the Motor Vehicles Act, claim petition claiming compensation for death of a person arising out of accident may be filed by all or any of the legal representatives of the deceased. Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that petitioners being unmarried minor sisters of the deceased are also his legal heirs. However, learned counsel for the petitioners is unable to refer to any provision of law or precedent in support of his contention. The petitioners are Muslims. No law has been cited to depict that minor unmarried sisters of a deceased are among his legal heirs. Even on equity, the petitioners cannot be impleaded as claimants in the claim petition because both parents of the petitioner are alive and the primary duty is of the parents to maintain the petitioners. In view of the aforesaid, I find no illegality in the impugned order of the Tribunal so as to warrant interference at the hands of this Court in exercise of power of superintendence under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. The revision petition is without any merit and is accordingly dismissed. ( L.N. Mittal ) February 25, 2010 Judge 'tiwana'