JUDGMENT 1. This appeal is filed by the original claimants of T.S(MAC) No.196/2015. They have challenged an order dated 30th November, 2018 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, West Tripura, Agartala. [2] Brief facts as under : One Uddalak Mukherjee expired in a vehicular accident on 16th June, 2015. His dependents, therefore, filed abovementioned claim petition seeking compensation from the owner and insurer of the vehicle involved in the accident. This claim petition came to be dismissed for non-prosecution by the impugned order dated 30th November, 2018. In such order, it was recorded that the claimants had not remained present on three successive occasions. The Claims Tribunal, therefore, formed a belief that they were not interested in pursuing the claim petition. [3] Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the claim petition was sent for settlement before the Lok Adalat. Such settlement could not be arrived at. The proceedings were, therefore, transferred back to the Claims Tribunal. The claimants were not aware about the further dates of hearing and therefore, could not remain present. [4] In facts of the present case, I am inclined to revive the claim petition and place before the Claims Tribunal for disposal in accordance with law. Even otherwise, the Claims Tribunal could not have dismissed the claim petition for default. The claim petition had to be decided on merits whether claimants appeared or not. [5] Chapter XII of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 pertains to Claims Tribunals. Claims Tribunals are constituted under Section 165 of the said Act. Under Section 166, application for compensation arising out of motor vehicles accident would be filed. On such application, the Claims Tribunal would pass award under Section 168. Sub-section (1) of Section 168 provides that on receipt of an application for compensation made under Section 166, the Claims Tribunal shall after giving notice to the insurer and after giving parties an opportunity of being heard, hold an inquiry into the claim or at the case in each of the claims and subject to the provisions of Section 163 they make an award determining amount of compensation which appears to it to be just and specifying the person or persons to whom compensation shall be paid. The award of the Claims Tribunal shall specify the amount which shall be paid by the insurer or owner or driver of the vehicle involved in the accident or by all or any of them, as the case may be. Paramount consideration before the Claims Tribunal, while passing award under sub-section (1) of Section 168 of the Act thus, is to award just compensation. [6] In case of Rocke Deb Burman v. Lohit Prakash Dutta and Anr. reported in (2006) 2 GLR 750 , learned Single Judge of Gauhati High Court referred to several other decisions and observed that for default in appearances of the claimant, a claim petition seeking compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 cannot be dismissed since there is no provision under the said Act empowering the Tribunal to dismiss the claim petition for default. The reference can also be made to a decision of Division Bench of this Court in case of Sankar Chandra Das v. Sujit Saha and Anr. reported in (2014) 2 TLR 336 . [7] In the result, impugned order is set aside. Claim petition is revived and placed back before the Tribunal which shall be decided in accordance with law. Appeal is disposed of. Connected application(s), if any, also stands disposed of.