The court emphasized the broad interpretation of 'use' under Section 165 of the Motor Vehicles Act, holding the MSRTC liable for the accident due to the negligence of its driver/conductor.

V.K. JADHAV, J.

1. Being aggrieved by the judgment and Award passed by the Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Basmathnagar, dated 7.3.2009 in M.A.C.P. No.37/2005, the original Respondent MSRTC has preferred this appeal.

2. Brief facts, giving rise to the present appeal are as follows :

(a) Deceased Uttam had been to Nanded for his personal work and after completing his work, he returned to Basmath by a S.T. Bus bearing registration No.MH20/ 8960. When the said ST Bus reached the Busstand of Basmath and while he was getting down from the bus, at that time, one Rashid Khan, who was a porter of the appellant/original respondent was unloading the goods from the top of the bus, at that time cloth bundle fell down on the person of the deceased Uttam. In consequence of which deceased Uttam sustained multiple injuries. He was immediately shifted to Rural Hospital, Basmath and therefrom to Nanded Hospital. However, due to his critical condition, when he was being shifted to Aurangabad Hospital, he succumbed to the injuries during transit. The claimants, legal representatives of the deceased Uttam approached the Tribunal by filing MACP No.37/2005 for grant of compensation under various heads. It has been contended in the claim petition that, said accident had taken place on account of the negligence on the part of driver and conductor of the said S.T.Bus and as such, appellant MSRTC is liable to pay the compensation. Deceased Uttam was in private service on monthly salary of Rs.3,000/and the claimants were depending on his income.

(b) Appellant MSRTC has strongly resisted the claim petition by filing its written statement. It has been contended that said porter Rashid Khan was not an employee of MSRTC and claim petition in the present form itself is not maintainable. It has also been contended that no crime is registered against the driver/conductor of the said bus and there is no negligence as such on the part of the driver or conductor of the bus.

(c) The claimants have adduced oral and documentary evidence in support of their contentions and appellant MSRTC has examined the then Traffic Controller Posted at S.T. Bus stand Basmath. The learned Member of the Tribunal by its impugned judgment and Award dated 7.3.2009 partly allowed the claim petition and thereby directed the respondent MSRTC to pay Rs.2,38,500/to the claimants along with interest @ 7% p.a. from the date of petition till its realization inclusive of No Fault Liability under Motor Vehicles Act. Hence, this appeal.

3. Learned counsel for appellant MSRTC submits that the claim petition as in the present form is not maintainable. Deceased Uttam had not sustained injuries, out of the use of the motor vehicle S.T.Bus bearing registration No.MH20/ 8960. Learned counsel submits that, if at all said accident as alleged had taken place on account of negligence of one Rashid Khan, who is not a porter appointed by the MSRTC, appellant-MSRTC is not liable to pay the compensation. Learned counsel submits that the claimants have utterly failed to prove the negligence if any on the part of the driver/conductor of the said S.T.Bus in causing death of deceased Uttam. The Tribunal has erroneously fastened the liability on the appellant-MSRTC to pay the compensation. Learned counsel for the appellant, however, has not made any submissions with regard to the quantum of the compensation, in the alternate.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant, in order to substantiate his contentions, placed his reliance on a case Lachoo Ram and Ors. v. Himachal Road Transport Corporation, reported in AIR 2014 SC (Supp) 1218.

5. Learned counsel for respondents claimants submits that, on the basis of the F.I.R., though, registered against the said porter Rashid Khan, spot panchnama, inquest panchnama and other police documents, the claimants have succeeded in proving that said accident had taken place out of the use of the S.T.Bus bearing registration No.MH20/ 8960. The claimants have proved that decease