F.A.O.NO. 891 OF 2007 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH F.A.O.NO. 891 OF 2007 Date of decision:10th August, 2010 United India Insurance Company Ltd. .......Appellant Versus Rajwinder Kaur and others ........Respondents BEFORE: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.KANNAN Present: Mr. R.M.Suri, Advocate, for the appellant. None for the respondents. 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes/No 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?Yes/No 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Yes/No K.Kannan, J.(Oral) 1. The appeal arises out of the claim for compensation for death of a scooterist who fell down from the scooter and died. The legal representatives filed an application under Section 163 (A) of the Motor Vehicles Act(hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'). The assumption before the Tribunal by the claimant was that Section 163(A) of the Act could be invoked, even if the death had been occasioned by negligence of the driver himself and every death by the use of motor vehicle would result in a justifiable cause of action. 2. I am afraid there is no such proposition possible for the provision under Section 163(A)(2) of the Act which merely F.A.O.NO. 891 OF 2007 2 makes unnecessary the need to plead and establish that the accident was the result of any wrongful act or neglect on the part of the owner or vehicle concerned or any other person. If the cause of action is the death of the owner of the vehicle who died by his own neglect, I do not think that Section 163(A) of the Act would apply at all. The claim is untenable and the award cannot be sustained in law. The award is set aside and the appeal is allowed. [K.KANNAN] JUDGE 10th August, 2010 Shivani Kaushik