1. Admit. By Consent of the parties, the appeal is taken for final hearing.

2. This Appeal is directed against the judgment and award dated 15th June, 2010 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Mumbai in M.A.C.P. No. 2554 of 1995 filed under section 163A of Motor Vehicle Act. The appellant is the original claimant, who has filed an appeal against the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal dismissing his application on the ground that the victim himself was negligent and the defence of wrongful act and neglect on the part of the victim adopted by the insurance company was fully accepted by the learned Member, Tribunal. Thus, the question involved in this appeal is whether the defence of fault liability of the victim/claimant is available to the insurance company or owner in the proceedings filed under Section 163A of the M.V. Act or not?

3. There is no dispute that the principle of no fault liability is in favour of the applicant against the owner/driver of the offending vehicle when application is filed under section 163A of the Act. The applicant is absolved from the burden of proving any negligence on the part of the driver or the owner of the vehicle concerned.

4. Section 163A itself is a complete code. This Section was added by Act No. 54 of 1994 and inserted in the Act of 1988 with effect from 14th November, 1994. Chapter X of the Motor Vehicles Act covers the case where the liability is without fault. Sections 140 to 144 take care of the cases covered under principle of No fault liability. Chapter XI pertains to insurance of motor vehicles against third party risks and under this Chapter, Section 163A is included. Undoubtedly, it covers a risk of third party and not the owner of the vehicle.

5. The new social issues crop up due to speedy technological development and new problems are faced by the people. The law needs to keep pace with this transition by making, adding, amending the law itself. Being a welfare State, the policies ensuring road safety and security are chalked out in the interest of public and Motor Vehicles Act is one of such social legislatures. To regulate and control the relationship and behaviour of the driver of the vehicle, owner of the vehicle and the pedestrians, the Act underwent various amendments and Section 163A is one of the additions. Every vehicle should be insured is a requirement of law, however, every vehicle is not going to meet with an accident. The purpose of the insurance is not narrow. The payment of premium by each vehicle owner is in fact a contribution towards common funds which is utilized for the purpose of accident caused to the victim or injured against any vehicle. Thus, the idea of beneficial legislation is enhanced and with a view to minimize the difficulties and hurdles of the victim/injured, section 163A is drafted.

6. It is true that this Section is not mentioned under Chapter X where the cases of no fault liability are mentioned. If owner or insurer is allowed to take the defence of negligence where application under section 163A is made, then the victim or injured will have to defend himself. It is argued by the counsel of the insurance company that the Section does not burden the claimant/injured to prove the negligence of the driver of the other vehicle, however, it cannot be interpreted conversely that the defence of negligence is not available to the owner or insurance company especially when provision of Section 140(4) is absent in Section 163A. This argument can be tested on the basis of its consequence and whether the consequence defeats the object of Section 163A or not is the answer to this argument.

7. Every accident generally takes place due to rashness or negligence of either of the parties. Negligence is entirely a matter of fact. Under Section 163A claimant need not prove or establish that the driver of the offending vehicle was at fault or negligent. If the insurer or owner takes stand that victim himself was negligent, then i