IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN FRIDAY, THE 8TH AUGUST 2008 / 17TH SRAVANA 1930 MACA.No. 1098 of 2007(D) ------------------------------------- O.P.(M.V).NO.1128/2003 OF MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, PALA. .................... APPELLANT/3RD RESPONDENT: ----------------------------------------------- UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., REP.BY ITS DEPUTY MANAGER, REGIONAL OFFICE, SHARANYA, HOSPITAL ROAD, KOCHI-11. BY ADV. SRI.P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON. RESPONDENTS/ PETITIONER & RESPONDENTS 1 & 2 RESPECTIVELY: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. AJI MATHEW, ALAPURATH (H), PALAKKARA, KADATHURUTHY P.O., KOTTAYAM, RESIDING AT POURNAMI, KURAVILANGADU, MEENACHIL, KURAVILANGADU. 2. JOSE KURIAN, PUTHENPURACKAL, MYLADUMPARA, MUTTUCHIRA P.O., KOTTAYAM. 3. A.S.MATHEW, ALAPURATH (H), PALAKARA, KADATHURUTHY P.O., KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.MANUEL KANCHIRAMATTAM. THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. M.N.KRISHNAN, J. -------------------------- M.A.C.A. No. 1098 OF 2007 --------------------- Dated this the 8th day of August, 2008 JUDGMENT This appeal is preferred against the award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Pala, in OP(MV) 1128/03. The Insurance Company has challenged the award on the ground that the claimant was a pillion rider and therefore in the light of the decision reported in United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Tilak Singh [2006 (4) SCC 404], it is not bound to indemnify the insured. But unfortunately no such contention regarding the pillion rider is taken in the written statement. I am also informed that this is a B policy i.e. a comprehensive policy. Tilak Singh’s case is applicable only in a Act only policy and additional premium is not paid. In the absence of any contention, it may not be right on the part of this court to entertain this question at this belated stage. Therefore, in the absence of the pleading, the question of non-liability of a pillion rider does not deserve consideration. The appeal lacks merit and it is accordingly dismissed. M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE vps