Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

17. The MACT framed four issues. The first, whether the claimants proved that Dinesh died in the motor accident arising out of the use of the TMT bus, was answered in the negative. The second was whether the opponents proved that the accident was Dinesh's fault. The MACT answered this in the affirmative. The MACT therefore declined to make an award and dismissed the petition.

18. On the second submission, Mr Gokhale is correct to this extent, that negligence or default need not be pleaded or proved; and sub-Section (2) makes this abundantly clear. The reason is that this is a special provision engrafted in a welfare statute to provide quick and cost-effective remedy to the needy. It allows for the award of a predetermined amount as final compensation, not subject to adjustment, without insisting on a protracted trial and without proof of negligence. It is in the nature of a social security scheme and is a self-contained code, distinct from Section 166 and Section 140. 5