IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN FRIDAY, THE 19TH MARCH 2010 / 28TH PHALGUNA 1931 MACA.No. 1953 of 2006() ----------------------- OPMV.144/2002 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, MUVATTUPUZHA .................... APPELLANT/3RD RESPONDENT: ------------------------------------------------ THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., THRIPUNITHURA, REPRESENTED BY ITS ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER, REGIONAL OFFICE, ERNAKULAM NORTH, KOCHI-18. BY ADV. MR.GEORGE CHERIAN (THIRUVALLA) RESPONDENT(S): CLAIMANT:RESPONDENTS 1 & 2: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. RANJITH S. BABU, S/O. K.K.SURESH BABU, PREM NIVAS, MAROOR KARA, ERNAKULAM VILLAGE, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. 2. GENESH G., S/O. GOVINDANKUTTY WARIER, ANJALI, VALOOR P.O., CHERUVALOOR (VIA), KORATTY. 3. JAISON JOHN, S/O. JOHN, MANGALATHIL HOUSE, ANTHINATTU KARA, LALAM VILLAGE, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss ORDER ON I.A.NO.2179/2006 IN MACA NO.1953/2006 DISMISSED 19/03/2010 SD/- M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE Kss M.N. KRISHNAN, J. ........................................... M.A.C.A.No.1953 OF 2006 ............................................. Dated this the 19th day of March, 2010. J U D G M E N T This appeal is preferred against the award of the Claims Tribunal, Muvattupuzha in OP(MV)No.144/2002. The claimant has been awarded a compensation of Rs.23,700/= and the insurance company's contention that the claimant is not covered by the policy has been negatived by the tribunal. The tribunal has stated in the award itself that the insurance company has raised a contention that it is only an act only policy and that it will not cover the risk of a pillion rider. 2. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the insurance company that it has moved an application- I.A.No.5096/2006 to receive the policy but it has not been considered by the tribunal. The learned counsel made available before me a photocopy of the petition as well as a copy of the policy which indicate that it is only an act only policy. Since the tribunal has not considered that issue and as it will affect the right of the owner of the vehicle, the matter requires reconsideration regarding the liability of the : 2 : M.A.C.A.No.1953 OF 2006 insurance company and for that purpose, I set aside the award and remit the case back to the tribunal. 3. In the result, the MACA is partly allowed and the award under challenge is set aside so far as it relates to the liability of the insurance company is concerned and the matter is remitted back to the tribunal for consideration of the question regarding liability of the insurance company by permitting all concerned to produce documentary as well as oral evidence in support of their respective contentions and then dispose of the matter in accordance with law. Since the owner has not chosen to appear before this Court, the insurance company is directed to take out notice to the owner for a proper disposal of the matter. Parties are directed to appear before the tribunal on 26.4.2010. Disposed of accordingly. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE cl : 3 : M.A.C.A.No.1953 OF 2006