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. 2103 of 2007(A) --------------------------------- OPMV.1818/2001 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, IRINJALAKUDA .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER IN OP (MV) : ---------------------------------------------- JOHN JOSEPH,S/O.OUSEPH MATTATHIL HOUSE, VEETTOOR,ERNAKULAM NOW RESIDING AT C/O.SEBI ELECTRICALS MAIN ROAD, CHALAKUDY, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.V.BABY SRI.A.N.SANTHOSH RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS IN OP(MV) : ----------------------------------------------------- 1. ABRAHAM, S/O.PAILEE CHERIYA NARIYELI HOUSE, VEETTOOR, NELLAD PO. 2. MANAGER. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD., ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.THOMAS MATHEW NELLIMOOTTIL - R2 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: M.N.KRISHNAN, J. -------------------------- M.A.C.A. No. 2103 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, Irinjalakuda, in OP(MV) 1818/01. The Tribunal awarded a compensation of Rs.43,400/- and exonerated the Insurance Company from the liability. It is challenging the quantum as well as exoneration of the Insurance Company, the claimant has come up in appeal. 2. Heard both sides. The first contention raised is that Ext.B1 policy is a comprehensive policy and not an Act only policy. But from the heading of the policy, it is described as B policy which clearly refers to a comprehensive policy. It is contended that in comprehensive policy there is a condition that an Insurance Company has undertaken to wipe off the liability in case of death or bodily injury to any person including a person conveyed in or on the motor cycle provided, such person is not carried for hire or reward. Unfortunately the conditions are not produced before the Tribunal and that what are the conditions governing the contract of insurance MACA No. 2103/07 2 in this particular case is not pleaded or proved. Therefore, the Tribunal’s decision arriving that it is only an Act only policy appears to be incorrect which requires interference. Since I am setting aside the award on that point and as there is a contention that the claimant is entitled to additional compensation that also shall be considered by the Tribunal. Therefore the award under challenge is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the Tribunal for fresh consideration as to whether the Insurance Company is liable to be exonerated from the liability and whether the claimant is entitled to get additional compensation. For this purpose both parties are permitted to produce documentary as well as oral evidence in support of their respective contentions and thereafter the Tribunal shall dispose of the matter in accordance with law. Parties are directed to appear before the Tribunal on 18.9.08. M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE vps MACA No. 2103/07 3