Legal representatives of a deceased borrower of a motor vehicle cannot claim compensation under Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act if the deceased had stepped into the shoes of the owner of the motor vehicle.

1. It is the admitted case of both sides that the appellant is the registered owner of the motor cycle bearing registration no.DL-4S-AY-5372 (motor cycle). On 23.03.2007, Raghuvir @ Raghuvir Singh was driving the said motor cycle on Rohtak Road near bus stand Mundka proceeding in the direction of Nangloi, Delhi. It has been the case of the claimants (respondents) in appeal that he had borrowed the said motor cycle from its registered owner i.e. the appellant. Though, in his contest to the claim petition, the appellant had taken the position that the deceased had taken the motor cycle from a co-worker at the workshop for a ride without his knowledge, consent or permission, the facts may be assumed to the contrary accepting the averments of the claimant to above effect.

2. Be that as it may, Raghuvir Singh was found dead, with motor cycle lying nearby, at about 7.42 p.m on 23.03.2007, this having been reported to police station Nangloi which initially logged DD no.81B and later converted into FIR no.261/2007. The post mortem examination of the dead body confirmed that he had died on account of ante mortem injuries which were likely to have been caused in a roadside accident. The investigation unfortunately could not bring out with any clarity the sequence of events leading to the death. The involvement of another motor vehicle could not be established as no eye witness could be found, the police eventually treating it as a case of “hit and run”.

3. The respondents instituted accident claim case (petition no.34/09, original no.227/07) seeking compensation invoking the principle of no fault liability under the structured formula in terms of Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 impleading the appellant as the sole respondent, the motor cycle not being insured against third party risk for the period in question. The claim case was contested by the appellant through written statement denying any liability raising the defence mentioned above. The matter was put to inquiry by issues framed on 04.07.2008. Mid-way the inquiry, the appellant was set ex parte. On the conclusion, the tribunal upheld the claim for compensation under Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act 1988 and, by judgment dated 03.07.2009, awarded compensation calculated in the sum of Rs.5,24,600/- fastening the liability on the appellant. It may be added that the claim was accepted as maintainable under Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act by the tribunal on the basis of the facts that the evidence had proved that the death had occurred in an accident involving use of the motor cycle the appellant being the owner of the said vehicle.

4. By the appeal at hand, the appellant questions the above mentioned judgment of the tribunal stating that the deceased, having borrowed the vehicle from him, had stepped into the shoes of the owner and therefore, the claim could not have been maintained.

5. Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act is a special provision for compensation on structured formula basis wherein the issues of wrongful act or neglect or default are irrelevant. The provision reads as under :-

“163A. Special provisions as to payment of compensation on structured formula basis- (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act or in any other law for time being in force or instrument having the force of law, the owner of the motor vehicle or the authorised insurer shall be liable to pay in the case of death or permanent disablement due to accident arising out of the use of motor vehicle, compensation, as indicated in the Second Schedule, to the legal heirs or the victim, as the case may be. Explanation-For the purposes of this sub-section, "permanent disability" shall have the same meaning and extent as in the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 (8 of 1923).

(2) In any claim for compensation under sub-section (1), the claimant shall not be required to plead or establish that the death or permanent disablement in respect of which the claim has been made was