Motor Accident Claim Cannot Be Dismissed Merely Because Injured Claimant Dies During Proceedings: P&H High Court
Saksham Vaishya
3 April 2026 4:05 PM IST
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has held that a claim petition filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act cannot be dismissed solely on the ground that the claimant died during the pendency of the proceedings. The Court observed that even if the death of the claimant is not established to be on account of the injuries sustained in the accident, the claim can still be continued by the legal representatives to the extent of loss caused to the estate.
Justice Deepak Gupta was hearing an appeal filed by the legal representatives of the original claimant, challenging the award dated 20.03.1999 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, whereby the claim petition was dismissed on the ground that the right to sue did not survive after her death. The claimant had sustained injuries in a road accident, following which she remained hospitalised and under treatment, but died during the pendency of the claim petition. The appellants contended that the Tribunal erred in dismissing the petition solely on account of the death of the claimant, asserting that the death had occurred due to the injuries sustained in the accident and that they ought to have been given an opportunity to lead evidence in support of this plea.
Relying on precedents, the Court reiterated that although a claim relating to personal injuries may not survive if the death is unrelated to the accident, the claim to the extent of loss caused to the estate would survive to the legal representatives. The Court also observed that while claims relating purely to personal pain and suffering may not survive, claims relating to loss to the estate would continue.
Applying the above position, the Court held that where an injured claimant dies during the pendency of proceedings, two situations may arise. If it is established that the death occurred due to the injuries sustained in the accident, the claim can be pursued as one arising out of death; however, even if such a connection is not established, the legal representatives are still entitled to continue the claim to the extent of loss to the estate, including medical expenses and other pecuniary losses incurred during treatment.
The Court found that the Tribunal had dismissed the claim petition solely on the ground that the claimant had died and failed to consider that the legal representatives were entitled to pursue the claim at least to the extent of loss to the estate. It observed:
“… the appellants were not afforded adequate opportunity to lead evidence in support of their plea… Such an opportunity ought to have been granted, particularly when the Motor Vehicles Act is a social welfare legislation intended to provide just and fair compensation…”
Accordingly, the High Court set aside the impugned award dated 20.03.1999 and remanded the matter to the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, with a direction to restore the claim petition to its original number and provide adequate opportunity to the appellants to lead evidence.
Case Title: Krishan Bhatia & Ors. vs. Virender Singh & Ors. [FAO-1774-2000 (O&M)]