THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY M.A.C.M.A.No.58 of 2011 JUDGMENT: This appeal is directed against the order, dated 11.11.2010, in O.P.No.254 of 2009 on the file of the learned Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-III Additional District & Sessions Judge (FTC), Medak, wherein the said claim application filed by the appellants herein under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, was dismissed. 2. Heard both sides. Perused the record. 3. Appellants herein filed the claim application seeking compensation of Rs.4,00,000/- for the death of Nacharam Swamy, who died in a motor vehicle accident that occurred on 26.05.2009. 1st claimant is the father; 2nd claimant is the mother and claimants 3 and 4 are the brothers of the deceased. According to the claimants, on that day, the deceased was going on a tractor and trailer bearing No.AP-23-G-8044/8045 with a load of cow dung and when the tractor reached near Kongodu-Nayani Jalalpur village, the vehicle overturned due to the rash and negligent driving of its driver as a result of which the deceased died. According to the claimants, the deceased was aged 19 years and was earning Rs.9000/- per month by doing labour work. 1st respondent-owner of the tractor and the 2nd respondent-insurer opposed the claim. 4 During enquiry before the Tribunal, P.Ws.1 and 2 were examined and Exs.A1 to A6 were marked on behalf of the claimants. R.Ws.1 and 2 were examined and Ex.B.1-copy of the policy was marked on behalf of the respondents. 5. By the impugned order, the Tribunal dismissed the claim application on the ground that in the claim application, the vehicle number is mentioned as AP-23-G- 8044/8055 whereas in Exs.A1 to A4, First Information Report; charge sheet; certified copy of scene of offence with rough sketch and inquest report, the number of the tractor and trailor is noted as AP-23-G-8404/8405. Therefore claimants have not established the identity of the offending vehicle. 6. During the pendency of this appeal, claimants filed M.A.C.M.A.M.P.No.3209 of 2011 under Order VI Rule 17 r/w Section 151 CPC seeking amendment of the number of the vehicle on the ground that due to typographical mistake, it was incorrectly mentioned in the claim application. This Court by order, dated 25.08.2011, allowed the said application and permitted the amendment in respect of the number of the vehicle by correcting the same as AP-23-G-8404/8405. Since the Tribunal has not considered the claim of the appellants regarding the quantum and also the liability of the respondents and dismissed the application merely on the ground that the number of the crime vehicle mentioned in the claim application is not tallying with Exs.A1 to A5 and that the vehicle number is permitted to be noted correctly by way of amendment, it is considered just and necessary to remit the matter to the Tribunal for fresh consideration and disposal in accordance with law and on its merits. The impugned order is accordingly set aside and the matter is remitted to the Tribunal for fresh disposal in accordance with law, preferably within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 7. In the result, appeal is allowed accordingly. _______________________ G.V.SEETHAPATHY, J 11th October, 2011 Tsy