JUDGMENT 1. Having sustained injuries in a motor accident on 16.2.2010 being hit by offending vehicle passenger Bus bearing registration No. MP 48 F/0010, the appellant filed a claim case before Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Betul vide MVC No. 53/2010. The Tribunal ascertaining 20% permanent disability in lieu of amputation of left leg from knee below awarded total compensation of Rs. 90.000/-, which included loss of income, for pain and suffering, medical expenses, nutritious diet, transportation expenditure. 2. Being dissatisfied by the amount of compensation awarded, the appellant preferred present appeal seeking enhancement in compensation. However, during pendency of this appeal, the sole appellant died on 6.10.2011. Application under Order 22 Rule 9 read with Order 22 Rule 3 of Civil Procedure Code, 1908 has been filed for setting aside the abatement and for bringing legal respesentative on record. 3. The impleadment is being objected by respondent No.3 on the ground that, the appeal under Motor Vehicles Act for enhancement by injured person on his death does not survive. It is urged that in view of section 306 of Indian Succession Act, 1925, legal representative of the claimant who suffered personal injury would only be entitled for loss of estate and the rest of the claim shall be abated. 4. Reliance is placed on a judgment by Full Bench of this Court in Smt. Bhagwati Bai and others v. Babu @ Mukund and others 2006(3) JLJ 397 = 2007 (1) MPHT 25 (FB). 5. 4. Reliance is placed on a judgment by Full Bench of this Court in Smt. Bhagwati Bai and others v. Babu @ Mukund and others 2006(3) JLJ 397 = 2007 (1) MPHT 25 (FB). 5. In Smt. Bhagwati Bai (supra) the Full Bench while considering the following question referred to: “Whether a claim for personal injuries filed under section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, except as regards the estate of the claimant would abate on the death of the claimant or would survive to his legal representatives?” After taking into consideration section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, section 306 of Indian Succession Act, 1925, and section 1 of the Legal Representatives Suits Act, 1855, held: “Thus, in a case of personal injury not resulting in death the legal representative of such person who was injured and who dies subsequently not on account of accident but for some other reason cannot maintain an applecation for compensation for personal injury sustained in an accident under sub-section (1) of section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, (Paragraph 9), and “Therefore, where the accident does not cause death of a party but only personal injury to him, his executors or administrators will not have a right to prosecute or continue to prosecute an application for compensation for personal injury suffered by the party in a motor accident. (Paragraph 10). It is further held that “an application for personal injury suffered by a person during lifetime in a motor accident can be maintained and continued by the representatives of the deceased person for the pecuniary loss occasioned to the estate of the deceased person so long as the accident has been caused within one year before his death. Moreover, the accident may have occasioned pecuniary loss to the estate of a person in many ways and it is for Tribunal or the Court to decide the loss which has been occasioned to the estate of the person who had suffered personal injury in a motor accident depending on the pleadings and proof before the Court in each case.” (paragraph 14). 6. In view of above and in absence of any cogent evidence on record the loss to the estate of the deceased claimant as would entitle the legal representatives to claim therefor, no cause survives after the death of the appellant. The appeal abates and is, therefore, dismissed.