A. M. SAPRE, J. ( 1 ) THIS appeal is by the claimants against an order rejecting their application made under section 140 of the motor Vehicles Act for grant of compensation on the principle of no fault liability during pendency of their main claim petition. The impugned order is dated 18. 8. 99, passed by XIV M. A. C. T. , Indore, in Claim case No. 61 of 1998. Facts lie in a narrow compass. ( 2 ) ONE Shyama Bai died on 22. 6. 1998 in an accident. The appellants are the legal representatives of late Shyama Bai. These appellants then filed a claim petition against the respondents claiming compensation under various heads as recognised under the Motor Vehicles Act. The appellants also applied under section 140 of Motor Vehicles Act claiming interim compensation on the principle of no fault liability from the respondents. Both, main claim petition as also the interim claim application were founded on the allegations that the offending vehicle in question bearing No. MP 12-B 1147 was owned by the respondent no. 2 and driven by respondent No. 1. It was insured with the respondent No. 3. It was further averred that the accident was the result of rash and negligent driving of the respondent No. 1 and hence, the appellants (claimants) are entitled to claim a statutory fixed compensation on the principle of no fault liability apart from the compensation under various other heads depending upon the evidence led on merits. ( 3 ) THE respondents denied their liability and contended that, prima facie, it is not established that the vehicle in question was involved in an accident. On this pleading, it was contended that no liability of any nature including even on the principle of no fault liability can be fastened on any of the respondents. ( 4 ) THE contention urged by the respondents found favour with the learned trial judge, the application filed by the appellants (claimants) under section 140 ibid resulted in dismissal by the impugned order. And, hence, appeal by claimants. ( 5 ) HEARD Mr. Manish Jain, learned counsel for the appellants (claimants) and mr. Anil Goyal, learned counsel for the respondent (insurance company) finally. ( 6 ) HAVING heard the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the view that trial court should not have dismissed the application made by the appellants. And, hence, appeal by claimants. ( 5 ) HEARD Mr. Manish Jain, learned counsel for the appellants (claimants) and mr. Anil Goyal, learned counsel for the respondent (insurance company) finally. ( 6 ) HAVING heard the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the view that trial court should not have dismissed the application made by the appellants. Instead, it should have allowed the application keeping in view the object for which section 140 was brought on statute book. This apart, in my opinion, there was enough material on record to prima facie conclude in favour of claimants that the vehicle in question was involved in an accident attracting the provisions of section 140 ibid. The claimants in support of their plea that the vehicle in question was involved in an accident resulting in the death of deceased Shyama bai, filed certified copies of several documents taken from the criminal case which was initiated against the respondent No. 1, the driver, under section 304-A of Indian penal Code. Perusal of final report filed under section 173, Criminal Procedure code clearly mentions the number of vehicle involved in the accident. Similarly, inspection report of vehicle in question dated 25. 6. 98 mentions the name of owner, the respondent No. 2, and also mentions the number of vehicle. Likewise, the same description finds place in an application made for taking the vehicle on superdnama. These very names and number are mentioned in insurance policy. The claimants had also in their claim petition mentioned these details. ( 7 ) IN my opinion, the aforesaid details do make out a prima facie case regarding involvement of respondents in the accident. The trial court, therefore, ought to have held in favour of claimants and should have awarded compensation in accordance with the requirements of section 140 of the act. ( 8 ) IN view of aforesaid discussion, I set aside the impugned award and allow the appeal. As a consequence, the application made by the appellants under section 140 of the Act stands allowed by awarding them compensation of Rs. 50,000 on the principle of no fault liability to be paid by the respondents, jointly and severally. Let the compensation money awarded be deposited in court within two months from the date of this order entitling the appellants to withdraw the same. 50,000 on the principle of no fault liability to be paid by the respondents, jointly and severally. Let the compensation money awarded be deposited in court within two months from the date of this order entitling the appellants to withdraw the same. Record of the trial court be sent back to enable the court to proceed with the trial on merits. Counsel's fees Rs. 1,000. Appeal allowed. .