IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 15TH OCTOBER 2008 / 23RD ASWINA 1930 MACA.No. 2297 of 2008() ----------------------- OPMV.387/2003 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, TRIVANDRUM .................... APPELLANT:3RD RESPONDENT: ------------------------------------------------ THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO.LTD., REGIONAL TOWERS, KANDAMKULATHY TOWERS, M.G. ROAD, ERNAKULAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS DULY AUTHORISED OFFICER. BY ADV. SRI.V.P.K.PANICKER RESPONDENTS:RESPONDENTS 1,2,4 & 5 & PETITIONER: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1. MANOHARAN, S/O.JAMES, MUKKUVANKUZHI VATTAVILA VEEDU, VENGANOOR, VENGANOOR P.O.,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. RAVIKUMAR, S/O.KRISHNAN NAIR, NIRMALA BHAVAN, KARIYIL, KAZHAKKUTTOM, KAZHAKKUTTOM P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. KATHREENA P.M., W/O.CHERIYAN KURIAN, HOUSE NO.SP 2/534-1, PADIKKAL HOUSE, PANGAPPARA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. M/S.ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO.LTD., DIVISIONAL OFFICE NO.1, THAKARAPPARAMBU JUNCTION, PAZHAVANGADI, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. SAGAR K., S/O.H.M.KASSIM, SAGAR LAND, KARIYIL, KAZHAKKUTTOM P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss M.N.KRISHNAN, J ===================== MACA No.2297 OF 2008 ===================== Dated this the 15th day of October 2008 JUDGMENT Since there is a fundamental mistake committed by the court below, I dispose of this appeal without notice and direct the court below to consider the matter afresh. The insurance company has preferred an appeal against the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Thiruvananthapuram in O.P.(MV)No.387/2003. The Tribunal proceeded to decide the case on the ground that the claimant in O.P.(MV)No.387/2003 is a pillion rider to the vehicle bearing Regn.No.KL-01/H-6476. The insurance company has raised a contention that the claimant was a pillion rider to the vehicle bearing Regn.No.KBE-4461 and there was only an Act only policy and therefore it is not liable to indemnify the insured for the injury sustained to the pillion rider. 2. I had also perused the copy of the original petition which was given to me by the learned counsel for the insurance company which also clearly in paragraph 28 states that the claimant was travelling as a pillion rider in the scooter bearing Regn.No.KBE 4461. I think the Tribunal has committed MACA 2297/2008 -:2:- the mistake thinking that the claimant was a pillion rider in the other vehicle involved in the accident and therefore it did not consider the question of indemnification of the insured with respect to the pillion rider to the offending vehicle in which the pillion rider was travelling. It is a matter which requires reconsideration. Therefore the award under challenge so far as it relates to the liability is concerned, is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the Tribunal for fresh consideration. The insurance company is directed to appear before the Tribunal on 25.11.2008 and thereafter the insurance company is directed to take out notice to the claimant as well as other respondents in O.P.(MV) No.387/2003 and then dispose of the matter in accordance with law. MACA is disposed of as above. M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE Cdp/-