IGH COURT OF CHHATTISGAR BILAS S h inqle Bench Hon’bl’e S i Dilip Raosaheb Deshmukh, J. i I } M.A.(c.) No. 605/20b6 ! } Bajaj Allianz General «In’surance Company Ltd. VUS erS Hiraudas Manikuri and otr p anhe ost for M -08-200 P 8 S- d/ Dilip Raosaeb Deshmukh Judge H H AT PUR h 1 ! I s I I ‘1 ‘ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH Sinqle Bench AT BILASPUR Appellaht N.A.No.2 Hon’ble Shri 'Dilip Raosaheb Deshmukh, J. ‘ M.A.(C.) No. 605/200/6 if Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Ltd. Through BEanch Manager, Branch Office, Shiv Mohan Bhawan, Vidhan Sabha Marg, Pandri, Raip’ur (C.G,) Versus Hiraudas . P.O. » a Bhaisa, Thana Kharora, Distt. Raipur (C.G.) 2. Santosh Kumar,‘ espondents Claimants AP Manikpuri, S/O‘ Firantadas Manikpurif Aged} about 22 years, r/o Khapradihkhurd, " S/o Vishnu . Prasad Sonwani, r/o Khapradihkhurd, P.S. Bhaisa, Thana Kharora, District Raipur (C.G.) PEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF MOTOR VEHICLE ACT 1988. Present: Shri Sachin Si’ngh Rajput, Counsel for the appellant. Shri A.L.Singroul, counsel appears ‘for Shri S.C.Verma, counsel for respondent No.1; ORDER (Passed on 25 a08.2008) The appellant/insurer is aggrievedby the award dated 26th June, 2006 passed by 11th Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (F.T.C), Raip‘ur in claims case No. 93/2006 whereby in an injury case compensation of Rs.14,000/— has been awarded to the claimants against the insurer. 2. Brief facts are ,that on 19-02-2005 at 6:30 PM respondent No.1 was travelling as a pillion rider on motor cycle No.CG 04 CJ 8793 (henceforth ‘the motor cycle’) driven by one Santuram Jangde, owned by respondent No.2, Santosh Kumar and insured by the appellant. Santuram Jangde died in the accident. Respondent No.1, Hiraudas Manikpuri sustained injuries. No rider. The Tribunal warded compensation of Rs.14,000/— againsLthe appellant/insurer. 3. ’ o premium was paid by r a pondent No.2 for covering the risk of the pillion The sole ground urged by Shri Sachin Singh Rajput, learned counsel for the appellant / insurer is that the claimant (respondent No.1) was a pilli R , rider on the motor cycle and no extra premuum as paid by the owner of the vehlcle to cover the risk of the pl|llon rider He also placed reliance on a deCISIon rendered by the Supreme Court of India In Oriental Insurance Co Ltd vs Sudhakaran K V & ors (CIVII Appeal No 3634 of 2008 ansmg out of S L P (C) No 19562/2006) In support of the argument / Learned counsel also submrtted that the entlre compensatron awarded by the Tribunal has been deposrted by the Insurer and therefore prayed that rlght to recover the compensation deposrted In the Tribunal by the Insurer be given to the appellant l l . C 4 Respondent No.2, despite serviceeof notice, did not appear before this ourt. 5. Having heard submission of learned counsel forrthe appellant/insurer, l have perused the record. In the case of Oriental Insurance: Co. Ltd. vs. Sudhakaran K.V. & ors. (Civil Appeal No. 3634 of 2008 arising out of S.L.P.(C) No.19562/2006), the'Supreme Court of India has held as under: “19 The law which emerges from the sald decisrons is (I) the liability of the insurance company in a case of this nature is" not extended to a pillion rider of the motor vehicle unless the requisite amount of premium is paid for covering his/her risk (ii) the. legal obligation arising under Section 147 of the Act cannot ‘ be extended to an injury or death of the owner of vehicle or the pillion rider; (iii) the pillion rider in a two wheeler was not to be treated as a - third party when the accident has taken place owing to rash and negligent riding of the scooter and not on the part of the driver of another vehicle.” Since in the present case the certificate-cum policy schedule clearly shows that no extra premium was paid to cover the risk of the pillion rider liability to pay compensation ought not to have been fastened on the insurer. 6. In the result, the appeal is allowed“ The appellant/insurer is exonerated from the liability to pay compensation. Since the ’entire compensation awarded by the Tribunal has been deposited by the appellant/insurer in the Tribunal, it may initiate proceeding to recover the sa from rodnt .N ; Santoh ua Sd—/ Dilip RaosaheB‘Deshmukh I V Judge me espne oiz s Kmr'