IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 11TH MARCH 2010 / 20TH PHALGUNA 1931 MACA.No. 233 of 2007() ---------------------- OPMV.1874/1997 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KOZHIKODE .................... APPELLANT/3RD RESPONDENT: ------------------------------------------------- THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO.LTD., METRO PALACE, GROUND FLOOR, OPP.NORTH RAILWAY STATION, ERNAKULAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER. BY ADV. MR.VPK.PANICKER RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONER & RESPONDENTS 1 & 2: ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. SIRAJUDHEEN, S/O.HUSSAIN, C THEKKE PARANGOTTU HOUSE, PILLASSERY POST, KUNNAMANGALAM. 2. MOHAMMED ISMAIL, S/O.ABDUL WAJID, THE STANDARD ESTABLISHMENT, OOTTY MYSORE ROAD, NANGANGUD, KARNATAKA. 3. MAJEER PASHA, S/O.MOHAMMED HANEEF, N.R.MOHALLA A1 BLOCK, DOOR NO.98, MYSORE. BY ADV. MR.THOMAS ANTONY THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss ORDER ON I.A.NO.331/2007 IN MACA NO.233/2007 DISMISSED 11/03/2010 SD/- M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE Kss M.N. KRISHNAN, J. ........................................... M.A.C.A.No.233 OF 2007 ............................................. Dated this the 11th day of March, 2010. J U D G M E N T This appeal is preferred against the award of the Claims Tribunal, Kozhikode in OP(MV)No.1874/1997. The minor petitioner, who was travelling in a goods vehicle, sustained injuries in a road accident and the tribunal has awarded him a compensation of Rs.26,250/= and directed the insurance company to deposit the amount and to get it reimbursed from respondents 1 and 2. It is against that decision, the insurance company has come up in appeal. 2. The tribunal on a consideration of the materials found that the claimant (minor) was not a person who was travelling as owner of the goods or representative of the owner of the goods. The tribunal also found that the petitioner is a non fare paying passenger not covered by the insurance policy in the case. The tribunal itself has arrived at a decision that the policy issued to the vehicle does not cover the risk of the claimant. When it is so one cannot expect the claimant to be compensated by the insurance : 2 : M.A.C.A.No.233 OF 2007 company and to get it reimbursed from the owner and the driver. 2. Since the terms and conditions of the policy does not cover the risk of the petitioner and as the petitioner is not an employee of the owner of the goods or representative of the owner of the goods is not covered under Section 147 of the Motor Vehicles Act and this position is well settled by the dictum laid down by the Supreme Court in New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v.Asha Rani (2003 (1) KLT 165). Therefore the insurance company is not liable and it has to be exonerated from the liability. 3. In the result, the appeal is allowed and the award passed as against the insurance company is set aside and the claimant is at liberty to proceed against the owner and driver of the vehicle who are jointly and severally liable for the amount from whom it can be recovered by the claimant. Disposed of accordingly. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. cl : 3 : M.A.C.A.No.233 OF 2007