IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 6TH JANUARY 2009 / 16TH POUSHA 1930 MACA.No. 1631 of 2008() ----------------------- OPMV.1295/2002 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, ALAPPUZHA .................... APPELLANT(S): APPELLANT/3RD RESPONDENT. --------------------------------------- UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD, REPRESENTED BY DEPUTY MANAGER, REGIONAL OFFICE, SHARANYA, HOSPITAL ROAD, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SMT.RAJI T.BHASKAR RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER & RESPONDENTS 1 & 2 . ----------------------------------------------------------- 1. KARTHIKEYAN, AGED 44 YEARS, PUTHENKULAKKADA VEETTIL, WARD NO.5, KAYIPPURAM, MUHAMMA PANCHAYAT, ALAPPUZHA. 2. LALKUMAR, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, S/O.KUMARAN, AMMAVEETTIL, WARD NO.4, MANNANCHERY PANCHAYAT, ALAPPUZHA. 3. K.SASI, S/O.KUMARAN, METTUMPURAM, AVALOOKKUNNU P.O.,ALAPPUZHA. THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: L.A.A.No. 1631/08 ORDER ON I.A. NO. 1939/08 IN M.A.C.A NO. 1631/08 DISMISSED. SD/- M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. 6.1.2009 //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE. M.N. KRISHNAN, J ----------------------- M.A.C.A.No. 1631 OF 2008 --------------------------------- Dated this the 6th day of January, 2009 JUDGMENT This appeal is preferred against the award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Alappuzha in O.P.(MV) No.1295/2002. The claimant was a pillion rider in a two wheeler and he sustained injuries in a road accident. The tribunal awarded a compensation of Rs. 15,000/- and made the Insurance Company liable. The learned counsel for the Insurance Company would contend that being a pillion rider and as no additional premium is collected, it is not bound to indemnify and therefore pleaded for exoneration of the liability. 2. The learned tribunal in para 8 of the award has specifically stated that no such contention is taken by the Insurance Company. Since the proposition is that there are policies like comprehensive policies and package policies with terms and conditions covering the risk of a pillion rider and unless there is a specific pleading regarding the exclusion of liability, it may not be right to consider that as a question of law because it is to be supported by facts as well. Therefore at this belated stage, I do not want to entertain that plea. Therefore the appeal lacks merit and accordingly it is dismissed. M.N. KRISHNAN,JUDGE vkm