The main legal point established is that under S.140 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, the claimant is not required to establish the wrongful act, neglect, or default of the owner or driver of the vehicle, and the liability of the owner or owners of the vehicles is joint and several.

This is a motor accident claim case involving the death of a person in a collision of two motor vehicles. The question for determination is whether the amount of compensation under S.140 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short 'the Act') is payable without establishing the identity of both the vehicles and wrongful act or neglect of the owners of the vehicles, which resulted in the accident causing the death.

2. The petitioners' son, Rajendra Prasad, was travelling in a taxi car on 22-11-1992 and in the course of the journey it was hit by a lorry which resulted in his death. After the accident the lorry was driven away swiftly leaving no chance to trace out its identity. However, the identity of the taxi-car was available since the deceased had travelled in the car. The petitioners, who are the legal heirs of the deceased, filed a petition, O.P.(M.V.) No. 181 of 1993 before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Palakkad claiming compensation on account of death of the deceased, who was the bread winner of the family and they were depending on him for their means of livelihood. They further filed an interlocutory application 1. A.No. 862 of 1994 under S.140 of the Act praying for a direction to the respondents to pay an interim compensation of Rs. 25,000/- under the head of 'no fault liability'. However, this application was opposed by the third respondent therein, M/s. Oriental Insurance Company Limited, Palakkad, contending that it was a'hit-and-run' case and hence the application was not maintainable. The Tribunal, however, rejected the application as per Ext. P3 order dated 1-4-1995. The said order is under challenge in this writ petition.

3. Learned counsel for the fourth respondent contends that the police could not direct the lorry which hit the taxi car and they had therefore filed a report before the Chief Judicial Magistrate's Court on 30-3-1993 to that effect. His further case is that this being a 'hit-and-run' case, the special provisions contained in S.161 of the Act alone will apply and hence, the petition under S.140 is not maintainable.

4. Chapter X of the Act deals with 'no fault liability' in certain cases. The provisions of this Chapter shall have over-riding effect on all other provisions contained in the Act or any other law for the time being in force, in view of S.144. S.140 refers to the maxim of 'no fault liability'. The claimant shall not be required to plead and establish that the death or permanent disablement was due to any wrongful act, neglect or default of the owner or owners of the vehicle or vehicles concerned or of any other person. This is what is provided in sub-section (3) of S.140. While dealing with the corresponding

S.92A of Act IV of 1939, Venkataramiah, J. held in Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation v. Ramanbhai Prabhatbhai (1987) 3 SCC 234): "This part of the Act is clearly a departure from the usual common law principle that a claimant should establish negligence on the part of the owner or driver of the motor vehicle before claiming any compensation for the death or permanent disablement caused on account of a motor vehicle accident."

5. What is required to be staled by a claimant for obtaining an order for compensation under S.140(I) of the Act is that the death or permanent disablement of of the victim has resulted from an accident arising out of the use of a motor vehicle or motor vehicles. When the Tribunal is satisfied with this requirement it can, by an order, direct the owner or owners of the motor vehicles to pay compensation in respect of such death or disablement under sub-section (I). While doing so the Tribunal is not concerned as to whether the accident was due to any wrongful act, neglect or default of the owner or driver of the vehicle nor was it due to such acts of the victim. What is embodied in S.140 is a modern measure of social justice in order to sustain and channelised socio-economic life of the people who approach the Tribunal for compensation wi