The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of the term 'accident arising out of the use of a motor vehicle' under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, emphasizing the wider connotation of the term 'use' and the causal relationship between the use of the motor vehicle and the accident.

1. The appellant has challenged the award of the Claims Tribunal whereby compensation of 4,65,800/- has been awarded to the respondents.

2. The accident dated 5th December, 2004 resulted in the death of Sunil Singh Chauhan. The deceased was employed as a driver on tanker No.HR-55B-6161. On 5th December, 2004 at about 12:00 p.m., the deceased parked the tanker at Village Hempur, Ismail, District Udham Singh Nagar and climbed over the tanker to check the inside condition of the tanker when he came in contact with an over-head electric wire and died on the spot. The deceased was survived by his father, widow and minor son who filed the claim petition under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act.

3. The learned counsel for the appellant has submitted at the time of hearing of this appeal that the deceased has not died because of any accident arising out of the use of the insured vehicle and, therefore, the appellant is not liable to pay any compensation. In the alternative, it is submitted that the liability of the appellant is restricted to 3,43,167/- under the Workmen’s Compensation Act.

4. The learned counsel for claimants/respondents No.1 to 3 has made the following submissions:- (i) The plea of limited liability under the Workmen’s Compensation Act was neither raised nor any evidence was led in support thereof by the appellant before the Claims Tribunal. The appellant has raised this plea for the first time before this Court. (ii) The deceased has died because of an accident arising out of the use of the motor vehicle and, therefore, the claimants are entitled to compensation under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act. (iii) The Claims Tribunal has not awarded any compensation for loss of estate. The Claims Tribunal has awarded interest @6% per annum instead of 9% per annum.

5. The plea of limited liability under the Workmen’s Compensation Act was not raised by the appellant before the Claims Tribunal. The appellant did not lead any evidence to substantiate this plea. This plea has been raised by the appellant for the first time before this Court. The appellant cannot, therefore, contend that the Claims Tribunal erred in any manner in not considering a plea not even raised. The plea of the appellant is, therefore, hereby rejected.

6. The next question that arises for consideration in this appeal is whether the deceased died due to the accident arising out of the use of a motor vehicle and is entitled to compensation under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act. The law in this regard is well settled by the following judgments:-

(i) In Shivaji Dayanu Patil v. Vatschala Uttam More, 1991 ACJ 777, there was a collision between a petrol tanker and a truck due to which the petrol tanker went off the road and fell at a distance of about 20 feet from the highway leading to leakage of petrol which collected nearby. Later an explosion took place in the petrol tanker resulting in fire. Number of persons who assembled near the petrol tanker sustained burn injuries and few of them succumbed to the injuries. The victims filed the claim petitions which were dismissed by the Claims Tribunal on the ground that the explosion and the fire had no connection with the accident, and was altogether an independent accident. The appeal was allowed by the learned Single Judge of the High Court holding that the explosion was a direct consequence of the accident. The Division Bench of the High Court affirmed the findings of the learned Single Judge against which the matter came up before the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court dismissed the Special Leave Petition holding that the explosion and fire resulting in injuries and death was due to the accident arising out of the use of the motor vehicle. The findings of the Supreme Court are reproduced hereunder:

“25. These decisions indicate that the word "use", in the context of motor vehicles, has been construed in a wider sense to include the period when the vehicle is not moving and is sta