UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD Vs. ABDUL RASHID

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Appellant United India Insurance Company Limited takes exception to the judgment dated 23.03.2005 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (the Claims Tribunal) whereby a Claim Petition under Section 140 and 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (the Act) preferred by the Respondents No.1 and 2 was suo moto converted under Section 163-A of the Act and compensation was awarded as per the Second Schedule.

(2.) IT is urged by the learned counsel for the Appellant that if the Claims Tribunal opined that the negligence which is sine qua non to a Petition under Section 166 of the Act was not proved, the Claims Tribunal could not have suo moto converted the Petition from the one under Section 166 of the Act to Section 163-A of the Act and award compensation on the basis of the structured formula.

(3.) TURNING to the facts of the instant case, the deceased Mohd. Umar suffered fatal injuries on account of bursting of tyre of vehicle No.HR-55- 6804 in which the deceased was travelling. The case is squarely covered by the judgment of the Supreme Court in Kaushnuma Begum (Smt.) & Ors. v. New India Assurance Co. Ltd., (2001) 2 SCC 9; where the Supreme Court applied the rule of strict liability to award compensation where the accident took place because of bursting of the tyre. Paras 10 to 16 of the report in Kaushnuma Begum are extracted hereunder:-