IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 14TH DECEMBER 2009 / 23RD AGRAHAYANA 1931 MACA.No. 2103 of 2009(A) ----------------------------- OPMV.2455/2003 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, THRISSUR .................... APPELLANT(S): 3RD RESPONDENT ------------------------------------- UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., TRICHUR BY ADV. SRI.P.V.JYOTHI PRASAD RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONER AND RESPONDENTS 1 AND 2 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. PRADEEP S/O. AYYAPPAKUTTY, KALLIYATH HOUSE, PARAKOVIL, PERINCHERI, THRISSUR. 2. C.V.PAUL, CHIRAYATH MANJIYIL HOUSE, MANNUTHY.P.O., THRISSUR. 3. KRISHNAN KUTTY, S/O. VASU, NADUVILEDATH HOUSE, MADAYALIKONAM.P.O., THRISSUR. THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.N. KRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = M.A.C.A. NO. 2103 OF 2009 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 14th day of December, 2009. J U D G M E N T This appeal is preferred against the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Thrissur in O.P.(MV)2455/03. The claimant, was a pillion rider and he was awarded a compensation of Rs.35,100/- and the insurance company was directed to pay the amount. It is against that decision the insurance company has come up in appeal. 2. Admittedly the policy issued is an an Act only policy. When an Act only policy is the subject matter in Tilak Singh's case [United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Tilak Singh)2006 (2) KLT 884(SC) it has been held that unless additional premium is paid for the coverage of the person the insurance company shall not be liable. The Tribunal had attempted to distinguish that decision stating that the amount of Rs.50 has been collected as additional premium for the coverage of P.A. to owner and driver. Really P.A. to owner and driver means personal accident M.A.C.A. 2103 OF 2009 -:2:- coverage. It is a policy covering them under certain circumstances. A reading of the policy makes it clear that only Rs.160 has been collected as premium towards third party and Rs.50/- is collected towards the risk of owner cum driver. It goes without saying that no premium is collected for the coverage of any other person. Being an an Act only policy as laid down by the Apex Court in Tilak Singh's case unless additional premium is paid for the coverage, liability will not get extended. Therefore I hold that the Tribunal has erred in arriving at a decision that the policy covers the risk. Therefore the award under challenge is modified and the insurance company is exonerated from the liability. The claimant is at liberty to proceed against respondents 1 and 2 in the claim petition jointly and severally for the realisation of the amount. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. ul/-