Guru Govekar v. Miss Filomena F. Lobo & Ors.

. o Thus on the facts of the case before us we are of the view that the insurer is liable to pay the compensation found to be due to the clai­ mant as a consequence of the injuties.sQffered by her in a public place on account of the car colliding with her on account of the negligence of the mechanic who had been engaged by ihe repairer who had under­ taken to repair the vehicle by virtue of the provisions contained in E section 94 of the Act which provides that rio person shall use except as a passenger or cause or allow any other person to use a motor vehicle in a public place, unless there is in force in relation to the use of the vehicle by that person or that other· ·person, as the case may be, a policy of insurance complying with the requirements of Chapter VIII of the Act. Any other view will expose innocent third parties to go F without compensation when they suffer injury on ac~ount of such motor accidents and will defeat the very object of introducing 'the necessity for taking out insurance policy under the Act. We, therefore, allow the appeal and modify the order passed by the High Court and direct the insurer, the Oriental Insurance Com- G pany Ltd. to pay to the claimant Miss Filomena F. Lobo a sum of Rs.90,000 along with interest and costs as directed by the Tribunal. The parties shall, however, bear their own costs in this Court and in the High Court. S.L. Appeal allowed H