IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 8TH DECEMBER 2009 / 17TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 MACA.No. 2514 of 2008() ----------------------- OPMV.2663/2001 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM .................... APPELLANT(S): 2ND RESPONDENT: ------------------------------------------------------ UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, THRIPUNITHURA NOW REPRESENTED BY ITS DEPUTY MANAGER, REGIONAL OFFICE, "SHARANYA", HOSPITAL ROAD, KOCHI-11. BY MR.MATHEWS JACOB, SENIOR ADVOCATE, MR.P.JACOB MATHEW. RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONER & RESPONDENTS 1 & 3: ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. CHARLY, S/O.VARGHESE, PUTHENPURACKAL HOUSE, KARIKKODU P.O., MULANTHURUTHY. 2. MOBY GEORGE, S/O.VARGHESE (BABY), EDAPPANGATTIL HOUSE, PERUMBILLY P.O. MULANTHURUTHY. 3. SAKTHIVEL S.RAJU, NEDUMTHATTIL HOUSE, GHS, MULANTHURUTHY. R1 BY ADVS. MR.ANIL S.RAJ, SMT.K.N.RAJANI, MR.RADHIKA RAJASEKHARAN P., SMT.ANILA PETER, MR.T.ABY JACOB. THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss ORDER ON I.A.NO.2998/2008 IN M.A.C.A.NO.2514/2008 CLOSED 8/12/2009 SD/- M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE Kss M.N. KRISHNAN, J. ........................................... M.A.C.A.No.2514 OF 2008 ............................................. Dated this the 8th day of December, 2009 J U D G M E N T This is an appeal preferred against the award of the Claims Tribunal, Ernakulam in OP(MV)No.2663/2001. The claimant a pillion rider sustained injuries in a road accident and he has been awarded a compensation of Rs.26,300/= and the insurance company has been directed to pay the amount. 2. The insurance company would contend that being a pillion rider and as the vehicle was only having an Act only policy it does not cover the risk of a pillion rider and therefore, extending the principle in United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Tilak Singh[(2006(2) KLT884(SC)], the insurance company is not bound to pay the amount. The owner of the vehicle did not contest the case before the court below. It is true that the pleadings are not consecutively but a total reading of the written statement would reveal that the insurance company has denied the liability and has also contended that he is only a pillion rider and thereafter also : 2 : M.A.C.A.No.2514 OF 2008 had produced copy of the policy. So a complete reading of the written statement may indicate that the insurance company is denying the liability. Therefore the matter has to be reconsidered and it is desirable that the insurance company files a proper additional written statement as well in this case. 3. Therefore, the award under challenge so far as it relates to the liability is concerned, without disturbing the quantum, remitted back to the Tribunal with a direction to all concerned to produce documentary evidence and adduce oral evidence in support of their respective contentions. Since the owner has not entered before the court and as his junction is proper and necessary, the insurance company is directed to take out notice to the owner after it enters appearance before the Tribunal. The parties are directed to appear before the Tribunal on 11.01.2010. Disposed of accordingly M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE cl : 3 : M.A.C.A.No.2514 OF 2008 : 4 : M.A.C.A.No.2514 OF 2008