BHATT, J. - (1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment and award passed by Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kutch at Bhuch, in Motor Accident Claim Petition No. 14 of 1975, by invoking the aids of the provisions of Sec. 110-D of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 ("Act" for short hereinafter). A short, but interesting question which has arisen in this appeal is, as to whether legal representatives of the deceased claimant, who had sustained injuries in a vehicular accident and who had died a death unconnected with the injuries which arose out of the road accident, are entitled to continue the action for compensation " With a view to appreciate the aforesaid question raised in this appeal, a resume of material facts may be stated at the out set.
(2.) One deceased Abdul Karim Musa, who is hereinafter referred to as the "original claimant" for the sake of convenience and brevity, claimed Rs. 9,999/ - by way of compensation for the personal injuries sustained by him in an accident on account of collision between a S. T. bus and a Motor Tanker. The accident in question occurred, on 21-1-1975, at about 10.00 a.m. when the claimant was travelling in a GSRTC Bus No. 4660 which was proceeding from Anjar to Rajkot, as a passenger. The said bus was driven by respondent No. 2/original opponent No. 2 and it was owned by respondent No. 1/original opponent No. 1. They are hereinafter referred to as the "original opponents Nos. 1 and 2" for the sake of convenience and brevity. It was alleged that the said Bus was driven by the original opponent No. 2 with excessive speed before the accident. The said S. T. bus collided with an Oil Tanker No. GTY 3265. The said Tanker was driven by original opponent No. 3, it was owned by original opponent No. 4 and it was insured with original opponent No. 5. Initially, the driver, owner and the insurer of the Tanker were impleaded as respondents Nos. 3, 4 and 5 in this appeal. Subsequently, respondents Nos. 3 and 4 i.e., original opponents No. 3 and 4, came to be deleted. As a result of the collision between the S. T. bus and the Motor Tanker, many passengers, including the original claimant, were injured. The original claimant, Abdul Karim Musa, was shifted to hospital as he had sustained injuries, including fracture on the left wrist. It was contended that the accident in question occurred on account of the rash and negligent driving on the part of the driver of the S. T. bus and the Tanker. Therefore, the original claimant claimed Rs. 9,999.00 by way of compensation for personal injuries sustained by him from all the opponents by filing the aforesaid claim petition, on 19-7-1975.
(3.) Unfortunately, the original claimant died, on 4-9-1976, during the pendency of the said claim petition before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal ("Tribunal" for short hereinafter). Thereafter the widow and the minor children of the deceased-original claimant, preferred an application, at Ex. 33, for being inpleaded them as heirs and legal representatives of the deceased, on 5-10-1976. It was contended in the said application under Order 22 Rule 3 of the Civil Procedure Code that the cause of action of the original claim made by the original claimant survived to them, being the heirs and legal representatives of the deceased. It was contended that they were entitled to be substituted in place of the original claimant and prosecute the original claim. The Tribunal was pleased to allow the said application and that is how the heirs and legal representatives of the original claimant, who are the appellants in this appeal, came to be impleaded as claimants, after the unfortunate demise of the original claimants.;