Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

10. The true meaning of the words, death due to accident arising out of use of motor vehicle was considered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Rita Devi and ors. vs. New India Assurance Co.Ltd. And Anr (2000 (5) SCC 113). In the said case, the vehicle was registered as a public carrier to be used for hire by passengers. The vehicle was hired by some unknown passengers. The vehicle was stolen after killing its driver. The legal representatives made a claim for compensation which was allowed by the Tribunal. The award was set aside by the High Court on the ground that it was a case of murder and not an accident.
11. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Rita Devi, considered various provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act and Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923. The Supreme Court opined that it was a case of accidental murder involving a vehicle and as such, the legal representatives were correct in making a claim for compensation before the Tribunal.
The Supreme Court said :
10. The question, therefore, is can a murder be an accident in any given case? There is no doubt that murder, as it is understood, in the common parlance is a felonious act where death is caused with intent and the perpetrators of that act normally have a motive against the victim for such killing. But there are also instances where murder can be by accident on a given set of facts. The difference between a murder which is not an accident and a murder which is an accident, depends on the proximity of the cause of such murder. In our opinion, if the dominent intention of the Act of felony is to kill any particular person then such killing is not an accidental murder but is a murder simplicitor, while if the cause of murder or act of murder was originally not intended and the same was caused in furtherance of any other felonious act then such murder is an accidental murder.

13. The issue raised by the appellant is therefore no more res integra in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Rita Devi and ors. vs. New India Assurance Co.Ltd. And Anr (2000 (5) SCC 113) and Kalim Khan vs. Fimindabee and others, (2018 (8) Scale 484).

14. The learned counsel for the appellant took up a further contention that since the word being used, it should be confined to a situation only when the vehicle is mobile. The said contention has no force in view of the fact that the word used has wider connotation even to cover the period when the vehicle is not moving and it is stationary. The use of vehicle would not cease on account of it having been rendered immobile on account of either mechanical defect or accident. The word Used should be given an extended meaning so as to include the period when the vehicle is stationary.