The interpretation of the word 'use' in section 110 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and its wide sense covering all employments of the motor vehicle on public places, including driving, parking, keeping stationary, repairing, leaving unattended.

Bhawani Singh, J.—All these appeals arise out of the same accident and since a similar question is involved, they are being decided by a common judgment.

2. Briefly, the case is that Bus No HIK 3227, driven by Kehar Singh and conducted by Ajeet Singh, left Pathankot bus stand on 20-5-1988. After just crossing Chakki Bridge, a bomb which was lying hidden in the bus, exploded, causing injuries to some and proving fatal to others travel ling in the bus.

3. Consequently, the heirs of the deceased and the victims of the blast preferred claim petitions before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (I), Kangra Division. Among other things, it has been stated that the bus was stationed at Bus-Stand, Pathankot which is a disturbed area and is hot with terrorist activities. Number of attempts had been made by the terrorists to attack Himachal Road Transport Corporation (hereafter HRTC) buses in the area of Punjab. However, nothing was done to safeguard the vehicles in this area and this bus was not attended by any Guard and the Conductor and the bus driver were not present in the bus for sufficient long time and no checking of passengers coming into and going out of the bus was done. The negligence of both, the Conductor and the driver has been pointed out to the extent that they allowed the bus to remain unattended in a disturbed area that was prone co serious terrorist activities and did not care to even check the luggage and passengers before starting the bus from the bus-stand. The HRTC., its driver and Conductor bad been quite reckless and negligent in attending to the bus and looking-after the safety of passengers with the result that someone planted the material inside the bus which exploded and caused fatal injuries to some and personal injuries to others on account of the use of the motor vehicle in question.

4. These allegations have been disputed by the HRTC, and their principal objection is that the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal has no jurisdiction to entertain the claim petitions, since the incident occurred due to terrorist activities and not out of the use of the motor vehicle. The allegation of negligence pointed out by the claimants has also been disputed and it has been stated that Guards are provided to night buses and it was the duty of the Incharge of the bus-stand to look-after the buses parked at the general bus-stand which belongs to the State of Punjab. It has also been stated that the passengers did not point out some unclaimed object lying in the bus and in case that had been done, prompt action could have been taken by the Conductor and the Driver, who also sustained injuries due to this explosion.

5. Instead of deciding the claim petitions on merits, the Tribunal proceeded to frame a preliminary issue in the following form :— "Whether the petition under the Motor Vehicles Act is maintainable ?"

6. After hearing the learned Counsel for the parties, the Tribunal came to the conclusion that it had jurisdiction to entertain the claim petitions. Accordingly, the preliminary objection was decided in the affirmative with the result that HRTC, preferred the present appeals against this decision of the Tribunal stating, inter alia, that the Tribunal did not decide the matter in accordance with law, since, looking to the facts of this case, the deaths or bodily injuries to persons did not arise out of the use of the motor vehicle According to the learned Counsel appearing for HRTC, the Tribunal has given such a wide interpretation to expression "use" that it was neither intended by the plain language of section 165 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (comparable to section 110 of the old Act). According to the learned Counsel this kind of incident is too remote and is something which is totally unconnected with the use of the vehicle.

7. There is no dispute that HRTC. bus HIK 3227 was being driven by Kehar Singh and Ajeet Singh was the Conductor in this bus on 20-5- 1988 and it was parked at bus stand Pathankot where vari