IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 15TH SEPTEMBER 2008 / 24TH BHADRA 1930 MACA.No. 1887 of 2008(C) ------------------------------- OPMV.1652/2000 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM .................... APPELLANT/ 3RD RESPONDENT ------------------------------- NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, MTPC CELL, REGIONAL OFFICE, KOCHI. BY ADV. SRI.RAJAN P.KALIYATH RESPONDENTS: PETITIONER, R1 AND R2 ---------------------------------------------- 1. SHIBU, S/O. GRGORY, RESIDING AT ODATHEKAL HOUSE, THUDATHUM KADAVU, VARAPUZHA, NOW RESIDING AT C/O. REMESH, KAMMATTIPADAM, NEAR K.S.R.T.C BUS STAND, KADAVANTHRA, KOCHI. 2. PRADEEP.A.V, ARAKALATH HOUSE, AYYAMPILLY, KUZHUPPILLY. 3. JOEMON, S/O. DEVASSYKUTTY, PAYAPPILLY HOUSE, MANNUMTHURUTHY, VARAPUZHA, PARAVOOR. BY THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.N. KRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = M.A.C.A. NO. 1887 OF 2008 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 15th day of September, 2008. J U D G M E N T This appeal is preferred against the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Ernakulam in O.P.(MV)1652/00. The claimant sustained injuries in a road accident and the Tribunal has awarded a compensation of Rs.53,655/-. The insurance company has come in appeal raising two contentions to the effect that one, that the claimant was only a pillion rider and secondly the pillion rider is not covered by the policy. There was another case which arose out of the same accident and it was settled by the insurance company as O.P.991/00. Admittedly, the claimant therein was a pillion rider and so the insurance company is now estopped from contending that a pillion rider is not covered by the policy. 2. So far as the other contention is concerned, the case of the claimant is that he was a pedestrian who was knocked down by a two wheeler and it was only in the additional written statement it was contended that he was also a pillion rider. The Tribunal relied upon the documents produced by the investigating agency namely the charge sheet and held that it is acceptable and therefore found that the case of the claimant that he was a pedestrian is true. These are all done by the Court on the basis of the factual matrix. Whatever it may be, even if he is a pillion rider, in the light of the clear bar of estoppal from raising the contention with respect to the same policy the insurance company cannot escape from the liability. Therefore I hold that there is nothing to interfere with the decision rendered by the Tribunal and hence the appeal lacks merit and it is dismissed. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. ul/-