IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 10TH SEPTEMBER 2009 / 19TH BHADRA 1931 MACA.No. 2071 of 2008() ---------------------------------- OPMV.1022/2004 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, PERUMBAVOOR .................... APPELLANT(S): 2ND RESPONDENT ----------------------- UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., PERUMBAVOOR. BY ADV. MR.PMM.NAJEEB KHAN RESPONDENT(S): CLAIMANT & R1 ------------------------- 1. SARAMMA, W/O MATHAI, THOKKANAL HOUSE, PAYYAL, NEDUNGAPRA P.O., KOTHAMANGALAM. 2. BABY T.M., S/O MATHAI, THOKKANAL HOUSE, PAYYAL, NEDUNGAPRA P.O., KOTHAMANGALAM. R1 – R2 BY ADV. MR.SOORAJ T.ELENJICKAL THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10/09/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ORDER ON I.A. NO.2461/2008 IN MACA. NO.2071/2008 DISMISSED 10/09/2009 SD/- M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE tss M.N. KRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = M.A.C.A. NO. 2071 OF 2008 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 10th day of September, 2009. J U D G M E N T This appeal is preferred against the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Perumbavoor in O.P.(MV)1022/04. The award was passed by the Tribunal on 2.2.07. Now the contention the learned counsel for the insurance company wants to canvass before me is that the claimant being a pillion rider and as the policy issued is only an Act only policy he is not covered by the terms of the policy and therefore the insurance company is not liable to indemnify the insured. It has to be borne in mind that the insurance company has filed a written statement. It has not raised any contention regarding its exemption from liability. Not only that the Tribunal has referred to these factors in paragraph 10 of the award. The Tribunal has very clearly stated that the insurance company has admitted that there is a full coverage policy issued to the offending vehicle. In turn the Tribunal further held that there is no contention for the insurance M.A.C.A. 2071 OF 2008 -:2:- company that the pillion rider is not covered. So unless and until there is a contention to the effect regarding the exemption of liability the Court cannot consider that question at all and therefore I cannot find fault with the Tribunal in arriving at a decision that the insurance company is liable to pay the amount. Therefore the appeal lacks merit and the same is dismissed. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. ul/-