PYLA NESTALAMMA Vs. SREERAM SETTI ADIBADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) TWO questions arise for decision in these two appeals. The first question is whether the provision in Section 92-A of the Motor Vehicles Act (for short the "Act") with regard to the liability on the principle of "no fault" brought in by Act 47 of 1982 is retrospective in nature. The second question is whether on the facts of each of these two appeals, the negligence on the part of the driver of the vehicle is made out.

(2.) C .M.A. 1006 of 1981 arises out of O.P. No. 54 of 1980 while C.M.A. 47 of 1982 arises out of O.P. 51 of 1980. These two O.Ps. and some other O.Ps. were disposed of by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, East Godavari at Rajahmundry by a common judgment. The Tribunal came to the conclusion that the evidence adduced on behalf of the claimants did not establish negligence on the part of the driver of the vehicle at the time when the two persons in question died consequent to the accidents occurred on 13-10-1979. On the basis of the said finding, the Tribunal dismissed the O Ps. Against the said judgment in respect of two O Ps. these two appeals are preferred in this Court.

(3.) ON the other hand, it is contended by Sri S.V.S R. Somayajulu, Learned Counsel for the Insurance Company that the provision introduced in Section 92-A of the Motor Vehicles Act is not retrospective and that, that section applies only to cases where the accident occurred subsequent to 1-10-1982. Alternatively, he contended that the finding of the lower court that there was no negligence on the part of the driver is correct.