IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 17TH SEPTEMBER 2009 / 26TH BHADRA 1931 MACA.No. 1857 of 2008() ---------------------------------- OPMV.880/2001 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, IRINJALAKUDA .................... APPELLANT(S): 3RD RESPONDENT --------------------------- THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, KODUNGALLUR NOW REPRESENTED BY ITS ASSISTANT MANAGER, REGIONAL OFFICE, METRO PALACE, KOCHI-18. BY MR.MATHEWS JACOB, SENIOR ADVOCATE BY ADV. MR.P.JACOB MATHEW RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONER & RESPONDENTS 1 & 2 ---------------------------- 1. C.A. ABDUL NAZAR, S/O. C.A. ABDUL KADHER CHAKKALAKAL HOUSE, KANDAMKULAM P.O., METHALA, KODUNGALLUR. 2. T.NARAYANAN, THEYYAPPARAMBIL HOUSE, MADAVANA P.O., KODUNGALLUR. 3. E.R.JOY, S/O. RAPHAELKUTTY, ERANJIKKAL HOUSE, KODUNGALLUR P.O. THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17/09/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: M.N.KRISHNAN, J. ........................................... M.A.C.A.NO.1857 OF 2008 ............................................. Dated this the 17th day of September, 2009 J U D G M E N T This is an appeal preferred against the award of the Claims Tribunal, Irinjalakkuda in OP(MV)No.880/01. The claimant, a pillion rider of a two wheeler, sustained injuries in a road accident and the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 45,441/= with 6% interest. The Tribunal had taken into consideration the disability of the claimant at 7%. 2. The contention of the insurance company in the appeal is that the vehicle was only covered by an act only policy and that in the light of the dictum laid down in Tilak Singh's case, a pillion rider is not covered by the policy as his status is that of a gratuitous passenger not covered by the policy. The learned counsel for the insurance company has made available before me for perusal a copy of the written statement wherein there is a specific contention that “the petitioner is alleged to be the pillion rider. He is not entitled to claim compensation of third party insurance”. So there is a specific contention. But, unfortunately the : 2 : M.A.C.A.NO.1857 OF 2008 Tribunal did not apply its mind though the policy was produced as Ext.B1. 3. If the appeal is allowed, there will be a total exoneration of the liability of the insurance company and the owner will be bound to pay the amount and not only that I find some coverage for two persons i.e, personal accidental coverage of Rs.42,000/=in the policy. In some cases, it is seen that when those persons suffer death or permanent disablement as per the specific endorsement in the policy, they may be covered by the policy. So, these are matters which require consideration. 4. Therefore, the award so far as it relates to the inter se dispute between the owner and the insurance company is set a side and the matter is remitted back to the Tribunal with a direction to consider the question whether that Ext.B1 policy covers the risk of the pillion rider in the case. Since the owner has not appeared before this Court, after appearance, I direct the insurance company to take out notice again so that he can also be heard and : 3 : M.A.C.A.NO.1857 OF 2008 disposed of. The parties are directed to appear before the Tribunal on 11.11.2009. Disposed of accordingly. M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE cl