IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM FRIDAY, THE 30TH OCTOBER 2009 / 8TH KARTHIKA 1931 RP.No. 938 of 2009() -------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN MACA.2997/2008 Dated 12/01/2009 .................... REVIEW PETITIONER/APPELANT ------------------------------ GIRISH, S/O.PRABHAKARAN, KUNNATHU VEEDU, MAMALAKANDOMAKARA, KUTTAMPUZHA VILLAGE, KOTHAMANGALAM TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.C.DILIP RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS -------------------------- 1. GEORGE S/O.THOMAS, CHIRAYATHU HOUSE, KOODALAPADUKARA, KOOVAPPADU VILLAGE, KUNNATHUNADU TALUK. 2. THE BRANCH MANAGER,, M/S.NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD, PERUMBAVOOR,. 3. JACOB @ YACOB, S/O.ITTAN, PALLIPARAMBAN, MATHIRAPPILLYKARA, KOTHAMANGALAM VILLAGE., 4. THE BRANCH MANAGER, M/S.NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LTD, PERUMBAVOOR. THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JJ. .................................................................... R.P. No.938 of 2009 in M.A.C.A. No.2997 of 2008 .................................................................... Dated this the 30th day of October, 2009. ORDER Ramachandran Nair, J. The appeal was dismissed by us at admission stage because contributory negligence was found on the part of the rider whose pillion rider appellant was. However, counsel for the review petitioner relied on judgment of the Supreme Court in ANTHONY T.O. V. KARVAMAN reported in 2008(2) KHC 80 and contended that even if policy of his rider's bike is Act policy only, still he is entitled to claim compensation from the rider personally. In view of this contention, we allow the Review Petition by recalling the judgment and direct posting of the appeal before regular Bench. C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR Judge C.K.ABDUL REHIM Judge pms