KASHIBAI LAXMAN KAMBLE Vs. RAJARAM GOMATIK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) On 2. 5. 2001 one Lax-man Pandurang Kamble, a resident of Reay road jhoparpatti had a quarrel with one bakshi Khan and Rabar Hussein and during the scuffle that ensued Laxman Kamble was thrown on the road and a lorry bearing no. MCY 1756 owned by respondent No. 1 ran over him. He was taken to hospital and was declared dead. The daughter of laxman Kamble filed F. I. R. with Byculla police Station and offence under sections 304, 304-A, 323 and 504 of Indian Penal code was registered against Bakshi Khan, rabar Hussein and the driver of the lorry.

(2.) The petitioner who is the widow of the deceased Laxman Kamble preferred an application No. 1255 (A) of 2001 before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, mumbai for no fault compensation under section 140 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The application was, however, rejected by the Tribunal on the ground that no nexus is established between the death and rash and negligent driving on the part of the driver of the lorry. The legality and propriety of this order is questioned in this petition.

(3.) I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. I have also gone through the relevant records including the F. I. R. It is clearly seen from the F. I. R. that the deceased was run over by the lorry owned by respondent No. 1 which is insured with the insurance company, respondent No. 2. The short question is whether the Tribunal was right in holding that, even so, the widow was not entitled to 'no fault compensation' under section 140 of the Motor Vehicles act. Section 140 reads as under: