IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN FRIDAY, THE 20TH JUNE 2008 / 30TH JYAISHTA 1930 MACA.No. 597 of 2005() -------------------------------- OPMV.1167/1997 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, IRINJALAKUDA .................... APPELLANT/2ND RESPONDENT. ---------------------------------------------- THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO.LTD., KODUNGALLUR, REPRESENTED BY ITS ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER, REGIONAL OFFICE, ERNAKULAM NORTH, KOCHI 18. BY ADV. SRI.GEORGE CHERIAN (THIRUVALLA) RESPONDENT/ CLAIMANT/RESPONDENT/1ST RESPONDENT. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. DEVADAS, S/O.BALAKRISHNAN, MATTAPPILLY HOUSE, P.O.POOPATHYU VIA. MALA, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 2. BABY ANTONY, KANNAMPUZHA HOUSE, POOPATHY P.O. , POYYA, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.V.CHANDRA MOHAN - R1 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ORDER ON I.A.NO.1349/05 IN MACA. NO.597/05. DISMISSED. 20/06/2008 SD/- M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE // TRUE COPY // Rs/ M.N. KRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = M.A.C.A. NO. 597 OF 2005 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 20th day of June, 2008. J U D G M E N T This appeal is preferred against the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Irinjalakuda in O.P.(MV)1167/97. It was an application filed by the rider of a vehicle under Section 163-A of the M.V. Act. The Tribunal on consideration of the materials awarded a compensation of Rs.38,360/- with 6% interest. The insurance company has challenged the same in appeal. 2. Heard the counsel for both sides. The learned counsel for the appellant strongly contends before me it is a case where the wrong doer himself comes before the Court claiming compensation and therefore Section 163-A does not support such a claim by a wrong doer. The matter has been considered by this Court in the decision reported in National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Komalavally Amma (2007 (1) KLT page 51 S.N.72). It has been held by this Court, M.A.C.A. 597 OF 2005 -:2:- “Section 163-A covers cases where negligence is on the part of the victim. Section 163-A, the expression “notwithstanding anything contained in this Act or in any other law for the time being in force” has been used, which goes to show that the Parliament intended to insert a non obstante clause of wide nature which would mean that the provisions of Section 163-A would apply despite the contrary provisions existing in the said Act or any other law for the time being in force. Section 163-A of the Act covers cases where even negligence is on the part of the victim. It is by way of an exception to S.166 and the concept of social justice has been duly taken care of. The question as to who is at fault is immaterial for an enquiry under S.163A.” In the light of this decision of the Division Bench no further discussion is required as far as this Court is concerned. Therefore contention of the insurance company is rejected and the appeal is dismissed. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. ul/-