IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.KOSHY & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA FRIDAY, THE 28TH MARCH 2008 / 8TH CHAITHRA 1930 MACA.No. 1623 of 2004() ----------------------- OPMV.338/2001 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, TRIVANDRUM .................... APPELLANT/2ND RESPONDENT: ------------------------------------------ THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO.LTD., REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER, REGIONAL OFFICE METRO PALACE, GROUND FLOOR, NORTH RAILWAY STATION ROAD, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.VPK.PANICKER RESPONDENTS: APPLICANTS & RESPONDENTS: -------------------------------------- 1. S. ANITHA KUMARI, W/O. LATE G. MADHUSOODANAN NAIR, PUTHEN VEEDU, T.C.41/912, PUTHENKOTTAH, MANACAUD P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. ARUN (MINOR) S/O. LATE MADHUSOODHANAN NAIR, OF DO. DO. 3. AKHIL (MINOR, S/O.LATE MADHUSOODHANAN NAIR OF DO. DO. 4. PUSHAPOM, W/O. LATE GOVINDA PILLAI, OF DO. DO. (DIED) 5. K. JAYAKUMAR, KEEZHE VEEDU, VAYYAMMOLA, VALLAKKADAVU P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 6. MR. MAHADEVAN, S/O. HARIHARA SUBRAMANYAN 86 AMMAN SAMADHI STREET, SHENCOTTAH, TAMIL NADU. 7. M. MURUGAN, S/O. MUNIYANDI THAYAR, 36-9, PULLIVASAL STREET, PRAMADECAM P.O., AMBAI, TAMILNADU. (DELETED) 8. M/S. NATIONAL INSURANCE CO.LTD., DIVISIONAL OFFICE, AZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. THE 7TH RESPONDENT OWNER IS DELETED VIDE ORDER DATED 11-1-2006 I.A. 46/2006 AT THE RISK OF THE APPELLANT. BY ADV. SRI.NAGARAJ NARAYANAN FOR R1 TO R3 SRI.SAIJO HASSAN SRI.A.S.SABU SRI.RAJAN P.KALIYATH FOR R8 SRI.THOMAS ABRAHAM FOR R5 SRI.K.B.ARUNKUMAR THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J.B.Koshy & K. Hema, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - M.A.C.A. No. 1623 of 2004 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 28th day of March, 2008 JUDGMENT The driver of the Mini Lorry sustained injury in a motor accident, when the above mini lorry hit a tanker lorry. He died soon after the accident. His dependents, wife and children, had filed application for compensation under section 163-A. It is a settled law that in 163A negligence need not be considered. Even though claim was allowed under section 163A assessment of negligence was also looked into by the Tribunal. 2. The Tribunal found that the deceased driver of the mini lorry was negligent 60% and the 4th respondent was negligent 40% and fixed the liability at the ratio of 60 to 40 between the owner of the mini lorry and owner of the tanker lorry respectively. The Tribunal directed the appellant Insurance Company to pay 60% of the amount and 5th respondent, being the insurer of the Tanker lorry, to pay 40% of the amount to the petitioners. The contention of the appellant is that the appellant is not liable to pay any MACA 1623/04 -2- compensation as there was no negligence on the driver of the lorry insured by the appellant. 3. Since claim under section 163A cannot be denied on the ground of negligence as held by the Full Bench of this Court in National Insurance Company Ltd. V. Muneer (2003(1) KLT 137. We see no justification in the argument made by the appellant Insurance Company. We also note that in Deepal Girishbhai Soni and others V. United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Baroda ((2004)5 SCC 385) the Apex Court held that by inserting section 164-A, Parliament intended to provide for the making of an award consisting of a predetermined sum without insisting on a long-drawn trial or without proof of negligence in causing the accident. 4. In the above circumstances, contention of the Insurance Company will not in the eye of law. Hence, the appeal is dismissed. J.B. Koshy, Judge K. Hema, Judge mn.