JUDGMENT Dated : 17^th January, 2025 The 3^rd respondent in OP(MV).No.269/2013 on the file of Additional MACT-II Thodupuzha is the appellant and the Original petitioner in the OP is the respondent. The above petition was filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act claiming compensation in respect of the death of Fr.Tom Kalathil, in a road traffic accident.

2. As per the averments in the petition, on 16.4.2013, Fr. Tom Kalathil was travelling in a motor bike bearing registration No.KL-6C-7444 from Pulliyanmala to Kattappana and when he reached near hill top, a lorry bearing registration No.KL-37-8293 driven by the 1^st respondent in a rash and negligent manner, hit on the motor bike and as a result of which he sustained serious injuries. He succumbed to the injuries at the hospital on the same day. The 2^nd respondent is the owner of the lorry and the 3^rd respondent is its insurer. In the OP he claimed a compensation of Rs.12 Lakhs.

3. Respondents 1 and 2 remained ex parte. The 3^rd respondent filed a written statement disputing the maintainability of the petition and alleging that the accident occurred due to the negligence of the deceased. It was further contended that the petiti