Ramakrishna Pillai, J.

1. The Insurance Company has come up in appeal.

2. On 29.3.1998 while the first respondent was riding a two wheeler he met with an accident in his attempt to overtake a bus proceeding ahead. He preferred a claim for Rs.1,70,000/-, against which the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.87,000/- as compensation.

3. The appellant Insurance Company, while admitting the policy contended that the accident was the result of the negligence on the part of the first respondent. To substantiate that, they relied on Ext.B1 which is the final report submitted by the Police before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court concerned requesting the court to refer the case as ‘mistake of fact’. The claim was preferred under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’ for short). After trial, the Tribunal found that the accident was the direct result of negligence of the first respondent. However, the learned Tribunal awarded compensation in terms of S.163A of the Act apportioning the negligence in the ratio 1:1 between the appellant and the driver of the bus and accordingly directed the appellant Insurance Company to pay 50% of the award am