IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 12TH AUGUST 2008 / 21ST SRAVANA 1930 M.A.C.A.No. 57 of 2007(B) --------------------- OPMV.1834/2002 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, TRIVANDRUM .................... APPELLANT/3RD RESPONDENT: ----------------------------------------- THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LTD., REP.BY THE DEPUTY MANAGER, REGIONAL OFFICE, M.G.ROAD, KOCHI-11. BY ADV. SRI.P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON RESPONDENTS/ PETITIONER & RESPONDENTS 1 AND 2 RESPECTIVELY. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1. T.SASIDHARAN, S/O.LATE K.THANKAPPAN NAIR RUGMINI MANDIRAM, PAYATTUVILA PO., KOTTUKAL VILLAGE, PIN- 695 501, (VIA) BALARAMAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. S.VINOD, S/O.SUKUMARAN, VINOD BHAVAN, ANAKUZHY, VAZHICHAL, THILRUVANANTHAPURAM DIST. PIN - 695 572. 3. G.ARUNKUMAR, S/O.GOPALAN, KUZHIVILAKATHU VEEDU, MANNOTTUKONAM, PAYATTUVILA P.O., PIN- 695 501, KOTTUKAL VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.G.SUDHEER FOR R1 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: vkm M.A.C.A.No. 57/07 ORDER ON I.A.NO. 59/2007 IN M.A.C.A.NO. 57/2007 DISMISSED. SD/- M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. 12.08.2008 /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE. vkm M.N.KRISHNAN, J. -------------------------- M.A.C.A. No. 57 OF 2007 --------------------- Dated this the 12th day of August, 2008 JUDGMENT This appeal is preferred against the award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Thiruvananthapuram, in OP(MV) 1834/02. The Insurance Company is the appellant herein. The claimant was a pillion rider. Now it is contended that being a pillion rider an Act only policy will not cover the same and therefore, the Insurance Company is not bound to indemnify. Unfortunately, such a pleading was not taken at all at the trial stage. So in the absence of such a pleading, the question of liability of a pillion rider cannot be considered at this belated stage. Therefore, the appeal lacks merit and it is dismissed. M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE vps