T STINIVASULU REDDY Vs. C GOVARDHANA NAIDU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A boy of 9 years died in a motor accident which occured on 7-9-1981 at about 12 noon involving a lorry bearing No. ADB 4366 owned by the 1st respondent and insured with the 2nd respondent. The father of the boy claimed a compensation of Rs. 30,000/-. The respondents contested the claim contending that there was no negligence on the part of the driver of the lorry and the accident occurred as the boy suddenly crossed the road. The tribunal on a consideration of the evidence found that the lorry was not at fault. On the question of compensation a sum of Rs l2,000/- was found to be just and reasonable. However in view of the finding that there was no negligence on the part of the lorry the claim petition was dismissed.

(2.) In this appeal Sri V. Patiabhi. the learned counsel for the appellant submits that the finding of the the Court below is erroneous. I have gone through the judgment under appeal and I do not find sufficient material to hold that the finding is unsustainable. But however I am of the view that under Section 92-A of the Motor Vehicles Act which came into effect from 1-10-1982 'introducing no fault liability' a sum of Rs. 15,000/- as contemplated under the said section can be given. I am told that in P. Nestalamma vs. S. Rambabu (1) 1987 (I) APLJ 46 (SN) my learned brother Jagannadha Rao, J held that 'the provision should be applied only to cases where accidents have taken place subse. quent to the date on which the provision has come into force. I am also told that in another Case my learned brother Upendralal Waghray J also took the same view.

(3.) Prima facie, I am unable to agree with that view. Section 92-A is as follows :