1. Appellant herein represented by his son and next friend filed claim petition before the M.A.C. Tribunal, Alleppey seeking compensation on account of the injuries sustained by him in a motor vehicle accident on the allegation that the accident occurred on account of the rash and negligent driving of the motor vehicle, namely, K.S.R.T.C. bus KLX 1705. The driver remained exparte. K.S.R.T. Corporation and the State Insurance Officer denied rashness or negligence on the part of the driver of the bus and alleged that the accident occurred because appellant was walking without caring for his own safety and crossed the road negligently. They also contended that the petition was not maintainable in as much as provisions of Order XXXII of the Code of Civil Procedure do not apply to proceedings before the Tribunal. They challenged the quantum of compensation claimed. The Tribunal upheld the contentions of the respondents and dismissed the petition. Hence this appeal.

2. One of the main controversies in the case relates to the competency of the injured to file a petition through his son and next friend under S.110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act (for short'the Act'). There is no dis