( 1 ) THIS is an appeal filed by the claimant, son of the deceased against the award dt. 31-10-1984 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Shajapur in Claim Case No. 12/83 whereby the learned Tribunal has dismissed the claim petition.

( 2 ) THE facts giving rise to this appeal, briefly stated, are as follows :-on 20-10-1982 the deceased Bhojraj was intending to travel as a passenger in the Guna-Ujjain Passenger Bus bearing registration No. CPH-8594 belonging to the respondent MP State Road Transport Corporation and while the bus in question was standing at the bus-stand in village Moman-Badodiya which is on Guna-Ujjain route, the luggage of deceased Bhojraj was put on the top of the bus and in order to check that luggage the deceased Bhojraj climbed up the ladder affixed to the rear portion of the bus. While the deceased was so climbing up, the ladder gave way and the deceased fell down on the ground, sustaining serious injuries which ultimately resulted in his death in T. Choithram Hospital, Indore where he had been brought for treatment after having been treated at Moman-Badodiya Hospital and Shajapur Hospital. The claimant son of the deceased filed this claim petition against the respondent Corporation claiming damages amounting to Rs. 1,00,000/ -.

( 3 ) THE learned Tribunal on appreciation of evidence adduced in the case came to the conclusion that the claimant was not entitled to any compensation and dismissed the claim petition. The learned Tribunal has held that it was not proved that the claimant was a passenger in the bus in question. This finding of the learned Tribunal is patently erroneous. The very fact that the luggage of the deceased was on the top of the bus shows that he intended to travel as a passenger in the bus in question.

( 4 ) LEARNED counsel for the Corporation has submitted that since the bus was stationary at the time the deceased fell dawn while climbing up the ladder attached to the bus, the death by accident of the deceased cannot be said to have arisen out of the use of Motor Vehicle and as such the claims Tribunal constituted under S. 110 (1) of the Motor Vehicles Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') cannot award any compensation. According to the submission of the learned counsel 'use of motor vehicle' implies that it should be in a state of motion.

( 5 ) THE claims Tribunal is constituted under S. 110 (1) of the Act for the purpose of adjudicating upon claims for compensation is respect of the accidents involving the death of, or bodily injury to, persons arising out of the use of Motor Vehicle, or damages to any property of a third party so arising or both, (Emphasis supplied ).

( 6 ) THE moot question to be considered for decision of this case, therefore, is whether the death of the deceased who died as a result of accident due to fall from the ladder attached to the bus while it was in a state of rest, could be said to be 'arising out of the use of motor vehicle'. The answer to this question depends on the interpretation of the word 'use' in the expression "arising out of the use of motor vehicle". The meaning of the word 'use' given in the compact Edition of the Oxford English Dictionary (Vol. II) reads as follows :-"act of using, or fact of being used; the act of employing the thing for any (especially a profitable) purpose; the fact, state or condition of being so employed; utilisation or employment for or with some aim or purpose, application or conversation to some (esp. good or useful) end. " in Webster's Unified Dictionary and Encyclopedia (Vol. 6) the word 'use' means "state of being in employment as, the car is in constant use. "

( 7 ) FROM the meaning of the word 'use' extracted from the dictionaries aforesaid it is clear that a motor vehicle which is in a state of being in employment for any purpose can be said to be a motor vehicle in use. While the bus in a state of motion it is employed in carrying passengers and while it is in a state of rest or st