Megha 904_905_ wp_13041_2024 & 13042_2024.docx IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.13041 OF 2024 The Principal, St Paul’s International School, Kolhapur ...Petitioner V/s. Smt. Ruksana Fakruddin Shaikh and Ors. ...Respondents WITH WRIT PETITION NO.13042 OF 2024 The Principal ST Paul’s International School, Kolhapur ...Petitioner V/s. Smt. Ruksana Fakruddin Shaikh and Ors. ...Respondents ______________ Mr. Sandeep Koregave for the Petitioner. Mr. Dnyanesh Patil i/b. Mr. Aditya Raktade and Mr. Anup Kamble for Respondent No.3 in WP/13041/2024 and for Respondent No.6 in WP/13042/2024. Mr. Venkatesh Shinde with Mr. Mayuresh Ingale, Mr. Aditya Hegde for Respondent No.1 in WP/13041/2024 and Respondent Nos.1 to 4 in WP/13042/2024. ______________ CORAM : SANDEEP V. MARNE, J. Dated : 14 February 2025. Page No. 1 of 4 14 February 2025 MEGHA SHREEDHAR PARAB Digitally signed by MEGHA SHREEDHAR PARAB Date: 2025.02.15 15:47:22 +0530 Megha 904_905_ wp_13041_2024 & 13042_2024.docx P.C. : 1) These Petitions are filed challenging orders dated 22 December 2023 passed by the District Judge-2 and Member, M.A.C.T., Ichalkaranji allowing Applications at Exhibit-5 filed in M.A.C.P. Nos.38 of 2022 and 39 of 2022 directing all the three opponents to the case to jointly and severally pay interim compensation of Rs.50,000/- and Rs.25,000/- under Section 140 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 (MV Act) under ‘No Fault Liability’(NFL). 2) I have heard Mr. Koregave, the learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner, Mr. Shinde, the learned counsel appearing for Respondent No.1 in Writ Petition No.13041 of 2024 and for Respondent Nos.1 to 4 in Writ Petition No.13042 of 2024 and Mr. Patil, the learned counsel appearing for Respondent No.3 in Writ Petition No.13041 of 2024 and for Respondent No.6 in Writ Petition No.13042 of 2024. 3) First objection raised by Mr. Koregave is about non- availability of provisions of Section 140 of the MV Act as on the date of filing of the Applications by the contesting Respondents. The claims have been filed on 3 October 2022 and according to Mr. Koregave Section 140 has been deleted by Section 50 of the Motor Vehicle (Amendment) Act, 2019 and that the amendment has been notified from 1 April 2022. Page No. 2 of 4 14 February 2025 Megha 904_905_ wp_13041_2024 & 13042_2024.docx 4) Mr. Shinde would counter this submission by relying upon judgment of Kerala High Court in Sathy and Ors. V/s. Dileep I.S. and Ors.1 in which it is held that date of occurrence of accident would be relevant for the purpose of deciding entitlement to recover compensation under NFL under Section 140 of the MV Act. He would submit that accident was occurred on 19 March 2022 when provisions of Section 140 were available in the MV Act. 5) In my view, it is not necessary to delve deeper into this aspect as Petitioner has far better case qua other point canvassed by Mr. Koregave. Petitioner is a school, which has merely hired the bus owned by opponent No.1-Trust, which was driven by Opponent No.2-Driver. Petitioner admittedly is not the owner or driver of the Bus. It therefore becomes highly questionable as to whether Petitioner can at all be held liable for payment of any compensation arising out of the said accident. If every person hiring a motor vehicle is made liable to pay compensation arising out of accident involving use of hired motor vehicle, the same would virtually make even a person hiring a cab liable for accident committed by cab driver. In my view, therefore, at least at the stage of determining NFL under Section 140 of the MV Act, Petitioner -School needs to be excluded from the purview of the impugned orders dated 22 December 2023. This would however shall not be interpreted to mean as if this Court has completely absolved the Petitioner from final liability that is 1 OP(MAC) No.51 of 2022, decided on 1 June 2022 Page No. 3 of 4 14 February 2025 Megha 904_905_ wp_13041_2024 & 13042_2024.docx sought to be attached to it in the claim Applications. Therefore, the impugned orders dated 22 December 2023 passed by the MACT deserve to be modified by excluding Petitioner from operative portion of the said orders. 6) Writ Petitions are accordingly partly succeed. Orders dated 22 December 2023 passed by the MACT shall stand modified to the limited extent of deletion of name of Petitioner (Opponent No.3) from liability to pay interim compensation under NFL under the provisions of Section 140 of the MV Act. So far as Opponent Nos.1 and 2 are concerned, orders dated 22 December 2023 are not disturbed and the same shall continue to operate. 7) With the above directions, Writ Petitions are allowed and disposed of. There shall be no orders as to costs. [SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.] Page No. 4 of 4 14 February 2025