VENKATESAN Vs. KASTHURI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The injured claimant Venkatesan in the claim petition in MCOP.No.99/2003 on the file of the learned Subordinate Judge, MACT, Maduranthagam has filed this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal, challenging the award dated 18.9.2009, being aggrieved by the award of compensation of Rs.1,74,754/- awarded by the Tribunal for the injuries sustained by him. The injured claimant/appellant died pending the appeal and the Appellants 2 to 4, who are the wife and daughters of the injured claimant, were brought on record as his legal representatives by order of this court dated 4.6.2012 made in CMP.No.1/2010 and thus, the said legal representatives are further prosecuting the litigation at present.

(2.) Mr.R.Nadana Sabapathy, the learned counsel for the Appellants would submit that in the facts and circumstances, taking into consideration the nature of the injuries, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is on the lower side and hence, the compensation requires to be enhanced. The learned counsel would contend that the legal representatives of an injured can further prosecute the litigation, since it is a loss to the estate of the deceased and hence, despite the fact that the original injured claimant is no more and died during the pendency of the appeal, the same may not come in the way of granting compensation by this court. The learned counsel referred to the decision of this court (Divisional Manager, New India Assurance Co. Limited Vs. S.V.Mani and others, 2009 AIR(Mad) 22) in support of his contention that the appeal filed by the injured claimant for enhancement of compensation would not get abated on the death of the deceased and the legal representatives/dependents are entitled to prosecute the appeal. The learned counsel for the Appellants has taken this court through the relevant portions of the order under challenge and would point out that the approach adopted by the Tribunal, in the facts and circumstances, cannot be said to be justifiable.

(3.) Per contra, Mr.G.Udayasankar, the learned counsel for the 2nd Respondent Insurance Company would contend that in such cases, after the death of the injured, the cause of action does not survive and the legal representatives are not entitled to further prosecute the litigation. The learned counsel would submit that at any rate, such awarding of compensation cannot be beyond the life time of the injured. Even otherwise, the learned counsel would contend that in the light of the evidence available on record and looking into the injuries, the award of compensation is just and reasonable.