IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 12TH JULY 2010 / 21ST ASHADHA 1932 MACA.No. 76 of 2009() ------------------------------ OPMV.27/2002 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, THRISSUR .................... APPELLANT(S): 3RD RESPONDENT -------------------------------------------------- NATIONAL INSURANCE CO.LTD. IRINJALAKUDA, REP. BY THE MANAGER, KOCHI REGIONAL OFFICE, M.G.ROAD, COCHIN-35. BY ADV. SRI.E.M.JOSEPH RESPONDENT(S): CLAIMANT & RESPONDENT 1 &2 -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. ABRAHAM, AGED 29, S/O.MATHAI, PUTHENPARAMBIL HOUSE, KAINOOR PUTHOOR , THRISSUR. 2. LEO RAJAN, OLLUKKARAN HOUSE, PUDUKKAD, THRISSUR. 3. RAMESH, S/O.VASU, AVIYAR HOUSE, THRIKKOOR, THRISSUR. THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ORDER ON IA. NO.67/2009 IN MACA. NO.76/2009 DISMISSED 12/07/2010 SD/- M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE tss M.N. KRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = M.A.C.A. NO. 76 OF 2009 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 12th day of July, 2010. J U D G M E N T This appeal is preferred against the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Thrissur in O.P.(MV)27/02. The claimant had sustained injuries in a road accident and the Tribunal awarded him a compensation of Rs.23,300/- and the insurance company has been directed to pay the amount. It is aggrieved by that decision the insurance company has come up in appeal. 2. Learned counsel for the appellant would contend that the policy being one, an act only policy, would not cover the risk of a pillion rider in a two wheeler and therefore the insurance company has to be exonerated from the liability. He had made available before me the policy for perusal. I find that only the basic premium for a third party risk as well as the third party property risk alone is paid and the policy is categorized as an Act only policy. As per the decision reported in Tilak Singh's case [United India Insurance M.A.C.A. 76 OF 2009 -:2:- Co. Ltd. v. Tilak Singh)2006 (2) KLT 884(SC) the Apex Court held that the status of the person travelling as a pillion rider would be that of gratuitous passenger not covered under the policy. Therefore the Tribunal was wrong in holding that the insurance company is liable when the policy is only an Act only policy and no additional premium is collected for the coverage of the pillion rider. Therefore the award of the Tribunal is modified and it is held that the insurance company is not liable for the amount and the claimant can proceed against respondents 1 and 2 in the claim petition jointly and severally for the realisation of the amount. If any amount is deposited by the insurance company before the Tribunal let it be reimbursed to them on proper application. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. ul/-