IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 29TH SEPTEMBER 2008 / 7TH ASWINA 1930 MACA.No. 1688 of 2006(D) ----------------------- OPMV.1809/2001 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, MUVATTUPUZHA .................... APPELLANT/3RD RESPONDENT: --------------------------------------- THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO.LTD., KOTHAMANGALAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER, REGIONAL OFFICE, ERNAKULAM NORTH, KOCHI-18. BY ADV. SRI.GEORGE CHERIAN (THIRUVALLA) RESPONDENT/CLAIMANT: ----------------------------------- 1. NASSAR, S/O. MYTHEEN, NADUKUDY HOUSE, NELLIKUZHY KARA, ERAMALLOOR VILLAGE. 2. MYTHEEN, S/O. ALIPAREETH, KOLLANKUDY HOUSE, KUTTILINGI KARA, ERAMALLOOR VILLAGE. * 3. T.A. MUHAMMED, S/O. ABDUL KHADER TOPPIL HOUSE, PAIPRA KARA, MULAVOOR VILLAGE. - DELETED * (THE 3RD RESPONDENT IS DELETED FROM THE PARTY ARRAY, AT THE RISK OF THE APPELLANT - VIDE ORDER DT. 1.2.2007 ON I.A. 210/07) THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 29/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: M.A.C.A.No. 1688/2006 ORDER ON I.A. NO. 1922/2006 IN M.A.C.A.NO. 1688/2006 DISMISSED. SD/- M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE 29/09/2008 /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE. vkm M.N.KRISHNAN, J. -------------------------- M.A.C.A. No. 1688 OF 2006 --------------------- Dated this the 29th day of September, 2008 JUDGMENT This appeal is preferred against the award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Muvattupuzha, in OP(MV) 1809/01. The claimant, who was a pillion rider, sustained injuries in a road accident. The Tribunal awarded him a compensation of Rs.13,500/- and affixed the liability on the Insurance Company. It is challenging the liability of the Insurance Company, the insurer has come up in appeal. 2. A perusal of para.4 of the award itself would reveal that there is a specific contention raised by the Insurance Company that the motor cycle was insured by them under an Act only policy. It also specifically contended that the policy does not cover the risk of a pillion rider. A copy of the policy has been produced before the Tribunal. The Tribunal did not consider that at all. 3. Learned counsel for the Insurance Company has made available before me a copy of Ext.B1, which would show that the motor cycle was covered by an Act only policy. The premium MACA No. 1688/06 2 collected are for liability to public Rs.77/- and additional third party property damage for an unlimited amount. So this policy does not cover the risk of a pillion rider. There is nothing to show that just like any comprehensive policy there is any condition whereby under the contract of insurance there is an independent coverage. The Apex court in the decision reported in United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Tilak Singh [2006 (4) SCC 404] has held that in an Act only policy the pillion rider is not covered and his status is that of a gratuitous passenger and as per the decision reported in New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Asha Rani [2003 (1) KLT 165 (SC)] it will not cover a gratuitous passenger. Therefore, the Tribunal has gone wrong in fixing the liability on the Insurance Company. Therefore, the appeal is allowed. The Insurance Company is exonerated from the liability. The claimant is entitled to proceed against respondents 1 and 2 in the claim petition jointly and severally. M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE vps MACA No. 1688/06 3