JUDGMENT : I.M. QUDDUSI, J. 1. This appeal has been filed by the claimants against the impugned order dated 4-12-2008 passed by the Addl. Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (FTC), Balod, District Durg (C.G.) in Claim Case No. 14/2008 dismissing the claim petition, as not maintainable. 2. Brief facts of the case as per the version of the claimants are as under: (i) The claimants are brother and sister of, deceased Gita Bai who was married with Shankarlal Halba, a resident of village Limhors. After a few days of the marriage, her husband died. Therefore, Gita Bai started residing in her maternal home at village, Faradfod. Her brother Durga Ram who is physically handicapped and Theli Bai, an unmarried sister both were also residing with the deceased. (ii) On 21-1-2008 deceased Gita Bai was returning from the matrimonial village Limhora to village Faradfod by Tractor having Regn. No. C. G. 7-D/8765 and Trolly Registration No. C. G. 7-D/9766. When the said vehicle, which was being driven by Respondent No. 1 in a rash and negligent manner, reached near the house of one Suresh Rana of village Faradfod met with accident, as a result of which Gita Bai fell down from the Tractor and sustained grievous injuries on her chest and back side. She was admitted in Shahid Hospital, Dallirajahra, where she died during the course of treatment. (iii) The deceased was having annual income of Rs. 60,000/- by means of agricultural works. Besides this, she was also working as Anganbadi worker and was earning Rs. 500/- per month. The claimants being dependents and legal representatives of the deceased, have made claim to the tune of Rs. 16,45,000/- on various heads. 3. The learned Claims Tribunal dismissed the Claim Petition on the ground that the claimants are not the legal representatives of the deceased as they are brother and sister and therefore, they are not entitled to receive any compensation. However, since the deceased was widow, her in-laws are deemed to be legal representatives. The Tribunal has recorded the findings that the offending vehicle has met with accident when Respondent No. 1 was driving it in a rash and negligent manner, as a result of which, the deceased has died and there was no negligence on the part of the deceased. 4. The Tribunal has recorded the findings that the offending vehicle has met with accident when Respondent No. 1 was driving it in a rash and negligent manner, as a result of which, the deceased has died and there was no negligence on the part of the deceased. 4. It has come in the evidence that about 20 years before the date of accident, the deceased was married and after 15 days of her marriage, she became widow and came back to her maternal house in village Farodfod where her physically handicapped brother and an unmarried sister were living. She extended financial help to them as the brother was unable to perform any work due to the reason that he is crippled and both his legs are not functioning. The sister was also unmarried and was dependent on her. In the maternal house, the deceased was earning by doing agricultural works. It was also stated that that deceased was an Anganbadi worker but it could not be proved by filing documents. Thus the claimants' were dependent upon the deceased and were living with her in village Farodfod. 5. Section 166(1) of the Motor. Vehicles Act, 1988 provides that an application for compensation arising out of an accident of the nature specified in Sub-section (1) of Section 165 may be made by the person who has sustained the injury; or by the owner of the property; or where death has resulted from the accident, by all or any of the legal representatives of the deceased. A proviso to this section has been added that where all the legal representatives of the deceased have not joined in any such application for compensation, the application shall be made on behalf of or for the benefit of all the legal representatives of the deceased and the legal representatives who have not so joined, shall be impleaded as Respondents to the application. 6. "Legal Representative" has not been defined in the Motor Vehicles Act or the Rules made there under. 6. "Legal Representative" has not been defined in the Motor Vehicles Act or the Rules made there under. It has been defined in Sub-section (11) of Section 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 which reads as under: legal representative" means a person who in law represents the estate of a deceased person, and includes any person who intermeddles with the estate of the deceased and where a party sues or is sued in a representative character the person on whom the estate devolves on the death of the party so suing or sued. 7. Certainly when the claimants were depending upon their widow sister by all means and she was living with them in the maternal home, it would be deemed that they represent the estate of the deceased and intermeddle with the estate of the deceased and therefore, are legal representatives of the deceased. The earning of the widow sister is the main source of livelihood of the claimants who were dependent on the deceased and if she was feeding her brother who is handicapped and unable to walk as also the unmarried sister and in case of her death by a motor accident, her dependents that is unmarried sister and physically handicapped brother are entitled to file claim petition in the capacity of legal representatives, as already discussed above. 8. In case of Smt. Manjuri Bera v. The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. and Anr. in Appeal (Civil) No. 1702/2007, decided on 30th of March, 2007 (reported in Smt. Manjuri Bera Vs. The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. and Another, (2007) 10 SCC 643 ), relying upon the decision rendered in Custodian of Branches of Banco National Ultramarino Vs. Nalini Bai Naique, (1989) 2 SCC 275 Supp, Hon'ble the Supreme Court held that "The definition contained in Section 2(11) CPC is inclusive in character and its scope is wide, it is not confined to legal heirs only. Instead it stipulates that a person who may or may not be legal heir, competent to inherit the property of the deceased can represent the estate of the deceased person. It includes heirs as well as persons who represent the estate even without title either as executors or administrators in possession of the estate of the deceased. All such persons would be covered by the expression 'legal representative. It includes heirs as well as persons who represent the estate even without title either as executors or administrators in possession of the estate of the deceased. All such persons would be covered by the expression 'legal representative. In Smt. Manjuri Bera's case (supra), the Supreme Court has further relied on a decision rendered in Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation, Ahmedabad Vs. Ramanbhai Prabhatbhai and Another, (1987) 3 SCC 234 and observed that "a legal representative is one who suffers on account of death of a person due to a motor vehicle accident and need not necessarily be a wife, husband, parent and child." 9. In view of the above mentioned facts and law, dismissing the claim by the Tribunal on the ground that claimants are not the legal representatives and the in-laws are the legal representatives of the deceased who became widow 20 years before the incident that is after 15 days of her marriage and thus the claimants are not entitled to get compensation, is erroneous. The Tribunal should have determined the legal representatives of the deceased as defined in Sub-section (11) of Section 2 of CPC as mentioned above and then only should have given its finding, which has not been done. 10. In view of what has been stated above, we are of the opinion that the findings given in the impugned award are also liable to be set aside. Therefore, the impugned award dated 4-12-2008 as well as the findings given therein are set aside. The mater is remitted back to the Tribunal for decision afresh. Needless to mention that the Tribunal shall provide opportunity to the parties to amend the pleadings, adduce further evidence, if any, file the documents or get the documents verified etc., and thereafter it shall decide the claim petition afresh at the earliest in light of the observations made herein above. The records of the Tribunal shall be sent back without further delay. 11. In the result, the appeal is allowed in part. No order as to costs.