The main legal principle established in the judgment is that under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, the owner and the Insurance Company of a motor vehicle are liable to pay compensation to the legal heirs of the deceased in the case of death arising out of the use of the motor vehicle, irrespective of whether the deceased was the driver of the vehicle.

V.M.Jain, J.

1. This appeal has been filed by the appellant Insurance Company challenging the award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, whereby compensation was awarded to the claimants for the death of Boby @ Bhartender in a motor vehicular accident.

2. The claimants had filed claim petition under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) claiming Rs. 10 lacs as compensation for the death of Boby @ Bhartender. The learned Tribunal found that vehicle No. HR03-B3088 was involved in the accident resulting in the death of the deceased. Resultantly, the owner and the Insurance Company of the said vehicle were held liable to pay the compensation amount to the claimants alongwith interest.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant Insurance Company submitted before us that the provisions of Section 163-A of the Act would not apply to the present case since Boby @ Bhartender himself was the driver of the said vehicle and as such his legal heirs could not claim compensation amount for the death of the deceased, in the petition under Section 163-A of the Act. Reliance has been placed on Appaji and Anr. v. M. Krishna and Anr., 2004 Accident Claims Tribunal 1289 (Karnataka).

4. However, we find no force in this submission of the learned counsel for the appellant Insurance Company. A perusal of Section 163-A of the Act would show that notwithstanding anything contained in the said Act or any other law for the time being in force or instrument having the force in law, the owner of the motor vehicle or the authorised insurer shall be liable to pay in the case of death or permanent disability 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. Thus, from a perusal of the provisions of Section 163-A of the Act, it would be clear that the owner and the Insurance Company would be liable to pay the compensation amount to the legal heirs of the deceased in the case of death where the accident had taken place "arising out of the use of motor vehicle". Even if the deceased was the driver of the motor vehicle in question, still the owner and the Insurance Company of the said Motor Vehicle would be liable to pay compensation to the legal heirs of the deceased under the "no fault liability" under Section 163-A of the Act. In this view of the matter, the learned Tribunal was perfectly justified in holding the owner and the Insurance Company liable to pay the compensation amount to the claimants.

5. The authority Apaji and Anr. v. M. Krishna and another (supra) relied upon by the learned counsel for the appellant Insurance Company, in our opinion, would have no application to the facts of the present case, in view of the provisions of Section 163-A of the Act since the owner of the vehicle would be liable to pay the compensation to the claimants and the Insurance Company would be liable to reimburse the owner of the vehicle.

6. No other point has been urged before us in this appeal.

7. In view of the above, finding no merit in this appeal, the same is hereby dismissed.