Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, which provides for no-fault liability and enhanced compensation in motor accident cases, is applicable to accidents that occurred prior to the commencement of the Act, and the proviso to Section 147(2), which provides for the continuation of limited liability insurance policies for a certain period, does not restrict the right of a claimant to enhanced compensation under Section 140.

1. - This appeal involves a challenge to the order dated October 4, 1991, passed by the Judge, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Bundi, whereby he has directed the owner and the insurance company to jointly and severally pay a sum of Rs. 25,000 to the respondents under Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short "the 1988 Act").

2. The respondents have filed a claim petition before the Motor Accidents Claim Tribunal, Bundi (for short "MACT") for compensation on account of death of Bhanwar Lal, husband of respondent No. 1 and father of respondents Nos. 2 to 5. In the claim petition it has been alleged that while Bhanwar Lal was travelling in Jeep No. RST 5325, the driver of the jeep Shri Rajendra Kumar drove the jeep rashly and negligently. On account of his rash and negligent driving the jeep suddenly overturned. Bhanwar Lal received serious injuries and ultimately died in Maharao Bhimsingh Hospital, at Kota. The jeep is insured with the appellant company.

3. The owner and the driver of the vehicle as well as the insurance company have filed their written statements and are contesting the claim on various grounds set out in the written statements. During the pendency of the proceedings the Tribunal has passed an interim award under Section 140 of the 1988 Act.

4. The only argument advanced by Mr. Alok Sharma, learned counsel for the appellant, is that while passing the interim award, the Tribunal has overlooked the proviso to Section 147(2) of the 1988 Act. The policy of the jeep No. RST 5325 was valid for a period from October 30, 1988, to October 29, 1989, and, therefore, the said policy must be deemed to be effective for a period of four months after the commencement of the 1988 Act or till the date of expiry of the policy, whichever was earlier. In view of this, the Tribunal could have awarded interim compensation only to the tune of Rs. 15,000 under Section 92A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (for short "the 1939 Act"). Shri Sharma argued that since the provisions of the 1988 Act have come into force on July 1, 1989, the policy must be deemed to be valid up to October 29, 1989, and, therefore, in respect of the accident which took place on August 14, 1989, the provisions of Section 140 could not have been invoked.

5. Section 92A of the 1939 Act, Section 140, Section 144 and the proviso to Section 147(2) of the 1988 Act deserve to be quoted for the purpose of appreciation of the arguments of learned counsel for the appellant :

"92A. Liability to pay compensation in certain cases on the principle of no fault.--(1) Where the death or permanent disablement of any person has resulted from an accident arising out of the use of a motor vehicle or motor vehicles, the owner of the vehicle shall, or, as the case may be, the owners of the vehicles shall, jointly and severally, be liable to pay compensation in respect of such death or disablement in accordance with the provisions pf this section.

(2) The amount of compensation which shall be payable under Sub-section (1) in respect of the death of any person shall be a fixed sum of fifteen thousand rupees and the amount of compensation payable under that sub-section in respect of the permanent disablement of any person shall be a fixed sum of seven thousand five hundred rupees.

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

(4) A claim for compensation under Sub-section (1) shall not be defeated by reason of any wrongful act, neglect or default of the person in respect of whose death or permanent disablement the claim has been made nor shall the quantum of compensation recoverable in respect of such death or permanent disablement be reduced on the basis of the share of such person in the respon