A.K. Gohil, J.
1. The appellants have preferred this appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for convenience) against the order dated 21.4.1999 passed by the Third Additional Member, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Mandsaur in Claim Case No. 61 of 1998 whereby the learned Member rejected the application moved under Section 140 of the Act for payment of interim compensation on the principle of 'no fault liability'.
2. The short submission of the learned counsel for the appellants is that the appellants are the legal representatives of the deceased Karulal and learned Member of the Tribunal has failed to hold an inquiry and has also failed to provide opportunity to lead evidence to the effect that the appellants are the legal representatives of the deceased Karulal and thus, wrongly rejected the application without holding an inquiry.
3. The learned counsel for the appellants also placed reliance on the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Shivaji Dayanu Patil v. Vatschala Uttam More 1991 ACJ 777 (SC), wherein it has been held that for awarding compensation under Section 92-A of the Act, the Claims Tribunal is required to satisfy itself in respect of the following matters:
(i) an accident has arisen out of the use of a motor vehicle;
(ii) the said accident has resulted in permanent disablement of the person who is making the claim or death of the person whose legal representative is making the claim;
(iii) the claim is made against the owner and the insurer of the motor vehicle involved in the accident.
He further relied on another Division Bench case of Himachal Road Trans. Corporation v. Garji Devi 1993 ACJ 804 (HP), in which the High Court of Himachal Pradesh also held the same relying on the decision of Shivaji Dayanu Patil (supra) observing that:
(i) the accident has arisen out of a motor vehicle;
(ii) the said accident has resulted in permanent disablement of the person, who is making the claim or death of the person, whose legal representative(s) is/are making the claim;
(iii) the claim is made against the owner and insurer of the motor vehicle involved in the accident;
(iv) the claim is made, in the case of the death of a person, by his legal representatives.
4. In reply, the submission of the learned counsel for the respondents is that the appellants could not file any documents in rebuttal and, therefore, the learned Member of the Tribunal could not decide whether the claimants are the legal representatives of the deceased or not. The learned Member of the Tribunal has deferred this matter for being decided after recording the evidence at the time of deciding the case on merits.
5. The State of Madhya Pradesh, in exercise of the powers conferred by various sections of the Act of 1988 has made M.P. Motor Vehicles Rules 1994. Rules 226, 227 and 228 are being quoted below:
226. Obtaining of information and documents necessary for awarding compensation under Section 140.-The Claims Tribunal shall obtain whatever information and documents which may be found necessary from the police, medical and other authorities and proceed to award the claim whether the parties who were given notice, appear or not, on the appointed date.
227. Judgment and award of compensation under Section 140-(1) The Claims Tribunal shall proceed to award the claim of compensation under Section 140 on the basis of-
(a) Application and statement of the parties,
(b) Accident information report in Form 54 of the Central Rules or certificate regarding ownership and insurance particulars of the vehicle involved in the accident, obtained from the registering authority;
(c) First information report;
(d) Post-mortem report or the death certificate or injury report in Form M.P.M.V.F. 76 (Comp. B) by medical officer who has examined the victim;
(e) Any other information or documents obtained by the Tribunal under Rule 226.
(2) The Claims Tribunal in passing orders shall make an award of compensation in respect of the death or permanent disablement to be paid by the insurer or owner of the vehicle involved in the accident, within a period of thirty days.
228. Procedure of disbursement of compensation under Section 140: Legal heirs in case of death.-Where the Claims Tribunal feels that the disbursement of actual amount due to the claimant is likely to take time because of the identification and the fixation of legal heirs of the deceased, the Claims Tribunal may call for the amount of compensation awarded, to be deposited with the Claims Tribunal and then proceed with the identification of the legal heirs for deciding the payment of compensation to each of the legal heirs.
6. Rule 226 provides that the Claims Tribunal shall obtain whatever information and documents which may be found necessary from the police, medical and other authorities and proceed to award the claim. Under Rule 228, the Claims Tribunal having the power to call for the amount of compensation awarded and then proceed with the identification of the legal representatives for deciding the payment of compensation to each of the legal representatives. Rule 228 provides powers to the Tribunal regarding identification of the legal representatives and Tribunal can hold summary inquiry for the purpose of identification of the legal representatives. In this case, the learned Member of the Claims Tribunal has not gone through the Rules 226, 227 and 228 of the Motor Vehicles Rules for the purposes of identification of the legal representatives of the deceased and has also not held any summary inquiry in the matter and rejected the application for grant of interim compensation on the principle of 'no fault liability'.
7. The provisions introduced as Section 140 in the Act of 1988 in regard to 'no fault liability' are part of ameliorative scheme of social justice. The provisions are beneficial in character. They are made in order to help the persons who are injured in such accidents or the legal representatives of the persons who sustained fatal injuries in such accidents and to secure minimum amount of compensation without being compelled to prove the fault of the persons whose fault alone would give rise to compensation. This section is clearly a departure from usual common law principle that a claimant should establish negligence on the part of the owner or driver of the motor vehicle before claiming any compensation for permanent disablement caused on account of a motor accident. This section is beneficial and social welfare piece of legislation and has been enacted with a view to providing immediate help to the victims of road accidents. Therefore, it is the duty of the courts to adopt a beneficial rule of construction and that construction should be preferred which fulfils the policy of legislature. The liability under Section 140 of the Act is made indefeasible, peremptory and total.
8. Consequently, the appeal is allowed and the impugned order passed by the learned Member of the Tribunal is set aside and the case is remanded to the Tribunal for deciding the application in accordance with law keeping in view the provisions of Rules 226, 227 and 228 of the M.P. Motor Vehicles Rules. The Tribunal shall as far as possible, decide the application within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of the copy of the order. The parties are directed to appear before the Tribunal on 27.9.1999 for hearing.
9. The parties are left to bear their own costs.