1. This appeal has been filed by the Insurance Company, which was respondent No.2 before the Member Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-III, Bagalkote (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Tribunal’ for short) in MVC No.818/2007.

2. In this appeal, the appellant-Insurance Company has taken a contention that the claimants have specifically pleaded that the income of the deceased was more than Rs. 40,000/-p.a., as such, the claim petition filed under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as ‘M.V. Act’ for short) is not maintainable.

3. During the pendency of the appeal, the respondents who were the claimants in the Tribunal below have filed I.A.No1/2017 under Order 6 Rule 17 read with Section 151 of CPC seeking permission to amend the provision to claim compensation mentioned in the claim petition as under Section 166 of the M.V. Act instead of 163-A of the same Act.

4. Both I.A.No.1/2017 and the main appeal are heard together. Perused the materials placed before the Court including the entire lower Court records. The points that arise for my consideration are:

(i) Whether the application filed under Order 6 Rule 17 read with Section 151 of CPC deserves t