IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI MONDAY, THE 18TH OCTOBER 2010 / 26TH ASWINA 1932 MACA.No. 1505 of 2007 --------------------- OPMV.24/1998 of IST ADDL.MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL,KOZHIKODE .................... APPELLANT(S): APPELLANT/PETITIONER ---------------------------------- P.BHARGAVAN, AGED 42 YEARS, S/O.P.NARENDRAN, PATTYERI PULPARAMBIL GARDEN HOUSE, MAVOOR AMSOM, CHERUPA DESOM, P.O.CHERUPA, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.JACOB ABRAHAM RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS -------------------------- 1. P.P.SHAJI, S/O.CHANDRAN, AGED 27 YEARS, PADAKKAPURATHU HOUSE, OLAVANNA P.O., KOZHIKODE. (DIED) 2. P.HARSHAN, S/O.RAJU, AGED 45 YEARS, PATTERY HOUSE, NEAR VETERINARY HOSPITAL, KOZHIKODE - 673 001. 3. THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO.LTD., DIVISIONAL OFFICE, KOZHIKODE-1. ADDL.R4 IMPLEADED: ADDL. R4. SHEENA.P.P., W/O.P.P.SHAJI, PADAKKAPURATHU HOUSE, OLAVANNA.P.O., KOZHIKODE. ADDL. R4 IMPLEADED AS THE LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE OF DECEAED R1 VIDE ORDER DT. 8/10/2010 IN IA.1610/2010. ADV. SRI.MATHEWS JACOB, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR R3 SRI.P.JACOB MATHEW FOR R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY ON 18/10/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: A.K. Basheer & P.Q. Barkath Ali, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - MACA.No. 1505 of 2007 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 18th day of October, 2010 Judgment Basheer, J: The short question that arises for consideration is whether the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal is justified in exonerating the Insurance Company from the liability to pay compensation to the appellant/claimant. 2. It is not in dispute that the accident occurred while the appellant was travelling as a pillion rider on a two wheeler. It is also beyond controversy that the policy issued by the Insurance Company in respect of the said two wheeler is only an “act only” policy. In other words, no additional premium was paid by the owner/insured to cover any other risk. In that view of the matter, the Tribunal in our view, was justified in holding that the Insurance Company would not be liable to indemnify the owner and pay compensation to the pillion rider. Moreover, the contention of the appellant that he would be entitled to get compensation under Section 163A of the Act cannot be countenanced, especially in view of the fact that he had already received compensation under Section 140 of the Act. MACA.1505/2007. : 2 : There is no merit in any of the contentions raised by the appellant. The appeal fails and it is accordingly dismissed. A.K. Basheer Judge. P.Q. Barkath Ali Judge. an.