IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 19TH AUGUST 2010 / 28TH SRAVANA 1932 MACA.No. 2067 of 2007() ----------------------- OPMV.551 /2002 of MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, N.PARAVUR .................... APPELLANT/3RD RESPONDENT :- ---------------------------------------------- NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD REP. BY ITS MANAGER REGIONAL OFFICE, 3RD PARTY WING, OMANA BUILDING PADMA JUNCTION, KOCHI-35. BY ADV. SMT.RAJI T.BHASKAR RESPONDENT(S)/PETITIONER AND RESPONDENTS 1 & 2 RESPECTIVELY :- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. THOMAS A.T.,S/O.THOMMANKUTTY AMBOOKKAN HOUSE, P.O.POYYA THRISSUR DIST. 2. ANTONY JOHN,S/O.JOHN AMBOOKKAN HOUSE, ADDABARI TEA ESTATE P.O. BALIPARA, SNITPUR, ASSAM. 3. ROY,S/O.JOHN,AMBOOKKAN HOUSE POYYA VILLAGE, KODUNGALLOOR TALUK. R1 BY MR.K.I.ABDUL RASHEED THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19/08/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: jvt M.N. KRISHNAN, J. ........................................... M.A.C.A.No.2067 OF 2007 ............................................. Dated this the 19th day of August, 2010 J U D G M E N T Here is a case where the claimant had sustained injuries in a road accident while travelling as the pillion rider. The Tribunal found that the accident took place on account of the negligence of the rider and granted a compensation of Rs.24,600/= to the claimant. It also found that the pillion rider is not covered but ultimately directed the insurance company to pay the amount and recover it from the owner. It is against that decision, the insurance company has come up in appeal. 2. Heard the learned counsel. The short point that arises for determination is regarding the liability of the insurance company. By virtue of the decision of the Supreme Court in United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Tilak Singh (2006(2)KLT 884), status of a pillion rider is that of a gratuitous passenger not covered by the policy. But it has been also held that when there is a comprehensive or package policy, the terms and conditions of the policy will cover the risk of the pillion rider. But, admittedly, in this : 2 : M.A.C.A.No.2067 OF 2007 case the vehicle is covered only by an act only policy. Therefore, the decision of the Apex Court in United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Tilak Singh (2006(2)KLT 884) will apply in all force to the facts of this case. When the policy does not cover a pillion rider, insurance company cannot be saddled with the liability. Ordinary recovery clause is granted when the company is liable, but there are breach of policy conditions which enables the company to get reimbursement from the insured. As far as this case is concerned, there is no coverage at all and therefore, the insurance policy cannot cover the risk of a pillion rider. 3. Therefore, the award of the Tribunal directing the insurance company to pay the amount and get it recovered from the owner is unsustainable in law and liable to be set aside and I do so. 4. In the result, the MACA is allowed. The insurance company is totally exonerated from the liability and the claimant is given an opportunity to proceed against respondents 1 and 2 jointly and severally for the realisation of the amount. Disposed of accordingly. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE cl : 3 : M.A.C.A.No.2067 OF 2007 : 4 : M.A.C.A.No.2067 OF 2007 M.N. KRISHNAN, J. ........................................... A.S.NO.OF 2010 ............................................. 2nd day of August, 2010. J U D G M E N T