JUDGMENT : M.D. SHAH, J. 1. This appeal is filed by the claimant Abhrajji Somaji Thakor who sustained injuries in vehicular accident against the judgment and award dated 27.9.2001 passed by the M.A.C. Tribunal (Aux. I), Ahmedabad (Rural) in M.A.C. Petition No. 10240 of 1994, whereby the learned Tribunal has awarded Rs. 5,28,040/- as compensation from the opponents jointly and severally along with 9% interest per annum from the date of application till realization. 2. During the pendency of this appeal, the claimant-appellant Abhrajji expired on 10.11.2002 and therefore Civil Application for bringing his legal heirs on record was filed being Civil Application No. 3111 of 2012 which was allowed by this Court (Coram: K.S. Jhaveri, J.) vide order dated 26.4.2012. So, the legal heirs of the deceased claimant are there on record as appellants. 3. Heard learned advocate Mr. Parmar for the appellants and learned advocate Mr. Thomas for learned advocate Mr. Nanavati for respondent no. 3. As per the submission of learned advocate Mr. Thomas, right to sue does not survive as the injured himself got compensation and he expired during the pendency of the appeal and so requested to dismiss the appeal. He placed reliance on the order dated 10.2.2012 passed by this Court (Coram: Bhaskar Bhattacharya, Actg. C.J.) in Civil Application No. 1044 of 2012. 4. On perusing the above referred order, it is observed on page 2 as under: “As provided in Section 306 of the Indian Succession Act, all demands whatsoever and all rights to prosecute or defend any action or special proceedings existing in favour of or against a person at the time of his decease, survive to and against his executors or administrators except causes of action for defamation, assault, as defined in the Indian Penal Code, 1860 [45 of 1860] or other personal injuries not causing the death of the party and except also cases where after the death of the party, relief sought should not be enjoyed or granting it would be nugatory. In the case before me, the subject matter of the Appeal being claim of compensation at the instance of the injured person not resulting in the death, in respect of part of the claim rejected by the Tribunal, the right to proceed with this Appeal cannot survive upon the heirs and legal representatives of the deceased appellant. In the case before me, the subject matter of the Appeal being claim of compensation at the instance of the injured person not resulting in the death, in respect of part of the claim rejected by the Tribunal, the right to proceed with this Appeal cannot survive upon the heirs and legal representatives of the deceased appellant. The learned advocate for the appellant has not disputed before me that the death of the appellant did not occur due to the accident which is the subject-matter of the present Appeal, as the accident took place in the year 1988 whereas the deceased died after the disposal of the claim application by the Tribunal below and during the pendency of this Appeal in the year 1996, i.e. eight years thereafter.” 5. The facts of the case on hand are similar to the case relied upon by learned advocate Mr. Thomas. In this case also, the death of the appellant did not occur due to the accident which is the subject-matter of the present Appeal, as the accident took place in the year 1994 whereas the deceased died after the disposal of the claim petition by the Tribunal and during the pendency of this Appeal in the year 2002. In view of the above, this appeal deserves to be dismissed and is accordingly dismissed. Appeal dismissed.