V. K. AGRAWAL, J. ( 1 ) HEARD finally with the consent of the parties. The appellant/claimant, father of the deceased, filed an application under section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for short)for grant of compensation on account of accidental death of his son, Shiv Kumar with truck bearing registration No. CPT 2561. The said truck was owned by respondent ( 2 ) AND its driver was respondent No. 1. Respondent No. 3 admittedly insured the said vehicle. The appellant/ claimant also filed an application under section 140 of the Act for grant of interim award on the principle of no fault liability. The averments were that one of the tyres of the truck had punctured; the truck was standing on the side of the road. Deceased Shiv Kumar came on a motor cycle, dashed against the truck and sustained fatal injuries. It also appears that respondent no. 1 was prosecuted regarding the said incident and he pleaded guilty and was accordingly punished. ( 3 ) THE learned Tribunal held that since the truck was stationary and it was not being driven rashly or negligently, grant of interim compensation would not be proper. ( 4 ) LEARNED counsel for the claimant/ appellant submitted that under section 140 of the Act, the only consideration ought to have been as to whether the death has resulted from an accident arising out of the use of the motor vehicle and if that was so, compensation under section 140 of the Act ought to have been awarded. It is clear that under section 140 of the Act on the principle of no fault liability, the owner of the vehicle is liable to pay compensation for death even when the accident is not due to the fault of the owner or driver of the vehicle. It_is also clear that in the instant case, the death occurred on account of deceased shiv Kumar dashing against the rear portion of the truck who sustained fatal injuries. If that be so, the driver, owner and the insurer would be liable to pay compensation under section 140 of the Act. ( 5 ) ACCORDINGLY, this appeal deserves to be allowed. The impugned order is set aside. It is directed that the respondents shall be jointly and severally liable to pay the amount of compensation of Rs. If that be so, the driver, owner and the insurer would be liable to pay compensation under section 140 of the Act. ( 5 ) ACCORDINGLY, this appeal deserves to be allowed. The impugned order is set aside. It is directed that the respondents shall be jointly and severally liable to pay the amount of compensation of Rs. 50,000 (rupees fifty thousand only) under section 140 of the Act to the claimant/appellant. The amount as above shall be disbursed to the claimant/appellant on his furnishing due security to the satisfaction of the Tribunal. Appeal allowed. .