The expression 'arising out of the use of the motor vehicle' in the Motor Vehicles Act should be given a wider interpretation, and claims should not be denied based on technicalities, especially in cases involving duty to protect life and property.

Shamsuddin, J.

Petitioners/ claimants in O.P.(M.V.) No. 347 of 1932 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Ernakulam are the appellants. The 1st appellant is the widow and other appellants are the children of deceased Augustine, who died in a motor accident.

2. Briefly stated, the case of the claimants is as follows: Augustine was a medical representative. He was a passenger in stage carriage bus bearing registration No. KLZ3058 on 26-11-1981. When the bus reached a place called 'Karingalikkadu' on the route angamali-manjapra, it dashed against a way-side electric post and then fell into a paddy field on the right side. In that process, it also hit a slay wire of an electric

transformer, with the result, the live wire came into contact with the stay wire. While Augustine attempted to come out of the bus, he got electric shock. The accident took place as a result of rash and negligent driving of the driver of the bus. Petitioners claimed Rs. 1,00,000/- as compensation.

3. Respondents 1 and 2, who were the owner and driver of the bus resisted the claim. In the joint written statement filed by them, they contended that the driver was not negligent and the accident occurred as the main leaf of the bus was broken. It was further averred that Augustine had already got out of the bus. It was when he tried to save the driver from the bus that he got electric shock. It was contended that in the circumstances, it cannot be said that the deceased died due to bus accident.

4. The 3rd respondent Insurance Company also raised contentions similar to those raised by respondents 1 and 2.

5. After considering the evidence, the Tribunal held that the accident look place as a result of the negligence of the 2nd respondent driver. However, the Tribunal came to the conclusion that Augustine had come out of the bus and that it was when he attempted to save the driver of the bus that he came into contact with the live wire and got electric shock, which resulted in his death. The Tribunal took the view that in the circumstances, it cannot be said that the injury arose out of the use of the motor vehicle. Accordingly, the claim petition was dismissed. However, on Issue No. 3, the Tribunal entered a finding that if the death of Augustine arose out of the use of the motor vehicle, the claimants are entitled to a compensation of Rs. 71,200/-.

6. In this appeal, learned counsel for the appellants vehemently contended that the view taken by the Tribunal is wrong. In view of the importance of the question involved in the appeal, we appointed Sri.B. Radhakrishnan as amicus curiae.

7. To appreciate the contentions raised by learned counsel on both sides and the amicus curiae it would be profitable to quote the relevant portion of the S.110 of Motor Vehicles Act:

"A State Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette constitute one or more Motor Accident Claims Tribunals (hereinafter referred to as Claims Tribunals) for such area as may be specified in the notification for the purpose of adjudicating upon claims for compensation in respect of accidents involving the death of or bodily injury to, persons arising out of the use of motor vehicles, or damages to any property of a third party so arising or both."

In S.110A, which deals with the application for compensation, it is provided:

" An application for compensation arising out of an accident of the nature specified in subsection (1) of S.110 may be made -

(a) by the person who has sustained the injury; or (aa) by the owner of the property; or

(b) where death has resulted from the accident, by all or any of the legal representatives of the deceased; or

(c) by any agent duly authorised by the person injured or all or any of the legal representatives of the deceased, as the case may be."

So, it is evident that in order to attract the provisions contained in Ss.110 and 110A, claims for compensation in respect of accidents involving the death of or bodily injury to persons should arise out