IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI WEDNESDAY, THE 22ND JUNE 2011 / 1ST ASHADHA 1933 MACA.No. 2590 of 2010() ----------------------- OPMV.331/2009 of MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KOZHIKODE .................... APPELLANT(S): -------------- 1. CHOYIKUTTY, S/O.MOOTHORAN NAIR, AGED 53, PALORA MOOTHIL VEEDU, THALAKULATHOOR.P.O. PARAMBATH, KOZHIKODE. 2. USHA, W/O.CHOYIKUTTY, AGED 43, PALORA MOOTHIL VEEDU, THALAKULATHOOR.P.O., PARAMBATH, KOZHIKODE. 3. SARUN, S/O.CHOYIKUTTY, AGED 22, PALORA MOOTHIL VEEDU, THALAKULATHOOR.P.O., PARAMBATH, KOZHIKODE. BY ADV. SRI.SHERRY J. THOMAS RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. PRADEEP KUMAR, S/O.BALAKURUP, AGE NOT KNOWN, PREETHI NIVAS, PATHIYARAKKARA.P.O., VADAKARA, KOZHIKODE.-673101 2. VINFRED RICHARD.C.K., AGE AND FATHERS NAME NOT KNOWN, MISSION COMPANT, MOORAD, PUTHUPPANAM.P.O, VADAKARA, KOZHIKODE.-673104 3. NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., KEVIS SHOPPING COMPLEX, NARANGAPURAM.P.O, THALASSERY, KANNUR. R3 BY ADV. SRI.GEORGE CHERIAN (THIRUVALLA) THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 22/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: A.K. BASHEER & P.Q. BARKATH ALI, JJ. ----------------------------------------------- M.A.C.A. No.2590 of 2010 ------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 22nd day of June, 2011 JUDGMENT A.K.Basheer, J. Appellants are parents and elder brother of a young victim of a road traffic accident. It appears that the youngster was knocked down by a mini lorry bearing registration No.KL-11-K-6955 while he was repairing an autorikshaw parked on the road side. 2. Appellants claimed compensation from the owner, driver and insurer of the alleged offending vehicle, initially under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act. But later it was converted as a petition under Section 163(A) of the Act, apparently on the advice of the learned counsel for the claimants. 3. The Tribunal dismissed the claim petition holding that the monthly income of the victim being Rs.3,500/-, his annual income would have exceeded Rs.40,000/- thus disentitling the appellants to claim compensation under Section 163 A of the Act. 4. Stranger still, it is revealed from the award that the police had charge sheeted the deceased for the offences punishable under Section 279 and 304 (A) of Indian Penal Code. We do not propose to make any observation in this regard at this stage. 5. There is considerable force in the contention raised by the appellant that the Tribunal ought to have taken a more pragmatic M.A.C.A. No.2590 of 2010 2 view in the matter, especially since the intent and purpose of this legislation is to wipe away the tears of the victims of accidents and their legal heirs. 6. Having carefully perused the impugned award and having heard learned counsel for the parties we have no hesitation to set aside the impugned award. We do so. 7. The Tribunal shall reconsider the matter and pass a revised award after affording sufficient opportunity to the parties to adduce evidence. It will be open to the appellants to carry out amendments in the claim petition, if so advised. The Tribunal shall dispose of the case as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. A.K.BASHEER, JUDGE. P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JUDGE. rkc