Hon'ble BHAGWATI, J.—Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment dated 4th January, 2001, whereby the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jaipur District, Jaipur dismissed the claim petition no. 115/1992 filed by the appellant Maqbool. 2. The facts giving rise to this appeal, in brief, are stated thus: “That on 30th August, 1989 at about 1.00 PM one truck bearing registration no. RRR 7175 and another truck bearing registration no. RRG 593 collided near Shivdas Pura Police Station resulting into the death of Ram Karan, Prabhat @ Bhagat and injuries to Maqbool and Jamnaram. It is stated that the appellant Maqbool was a cleaner of truck no. RRR 7175 and sitting inside the truck when the accident occurred. 3. Heard learned counsel for the parties and carefully perused the material available on record including the impugned judgment. 4. Having reflected over the submissions made at the bar and carefully perused the impugned judgment, it is noticed that the learned Tribunal dismissed the claim of appellant Maqbool on the ground that he was travelling in truck RRR 7175, whose driver's rash and negligent driving, the accident took place. While adjudicating the issues no. 1 and 2, the learned Tribunal held that the accident occurred on account of the rash and negligent driving of the driver of truck no. RRR 7175. On this ground, the learned Tribunal dis-entitled him to claim compensation. 5. It is very pertinent to note here that Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (here-in-after referred to as 'Act 1988') envisages that an application for compensation arising out of an accident of the nature specified in sub-section (1) of Section 165 may be made by the person, who has sustained injury. Section 165 of the Act contemplates that State Government may by Notification in the Official Gazette constitute one or more Motor Accident Claims Tribunals for such area as may be specified in the Notification for the purpose of adjudicating upon the claims for compensation in respect of accidents involving the death of, or bodily injury to, persons arising out of the use of motor vehicles or damages to any property of a third party so arising, or both. 6. 6. A bare reading of Section 165 coupled with Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 suggests that if any person dies or any person sustains bodily injury in an accident arising out of the use of motor vehicles, he can file an application for compensation arising out of that accident under Section 166 of the 'Act 1988'. In the case at hand, the appellant was sitting in truck RRR 7175 and during the accident he sustained the bodily injuries. It is immaterial in the instant case as to whether the accident occurred on account of the rash and negligent driving of truck no. RRR 7175 wherein the appellant was sitting or the truck No. RRG 593. There was no fault on the part of the appellant as neither he was driving any vehicle nor was he an instrument to the accident. The appellant, in fact, was an employee as cleaner on Truck RRR 7175 who sustained injuries out of an accident between two trucks and he could claim compensation from any of the Insurance Company or Companies with whom these two trucks were insured. The learned Tribunal did not visualize the scheme and object of Sections 165 and 166 of Act, 1988. The non reasoned finding arrived at cursorily, in brief, by the Tribunal is totally contrary to the provisions of law. I am of the opinion that the matter should go back to the learned Tribunal for determination of the matter afresh. 7. Consequently, the appeal is partly allowed, the impugned judgment dated 4.1.2001 pertaining to claim petition no. 115/92 is set-aside and in view of above legal position, the case is remitted back to the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jaipur District, Jaipur for deciding the matter afresh. 8. Both the parties are directed to remain present before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jaipur District Jaipur on 22nd February, 2010. The record be sent back to the learned Tribunal forthwith.