IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 10TH JUNE 2008 / 20TH JYAISHTA 1930 MACA.No. 824 of 2007(F) ----------------------------------- O.P(MV).NO.2773/2001 OF MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, THRISSUR .................... APPELLANT/2ND RESPONDENT: ----------------------------------------------- UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., REPRESENTED BY ITS ASSISTANT MANAGER, REGIONAL OFFICE, SHARANYA, HOSPITAL ROAD, KOCHI-11. BY ADV. SRI.P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON. RESPONDENTS/ PETITIONER & 1ST RESPONDENT RESPECTIVELY: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. BAKKAR @ ABUBAKKAR M.V., S/O.VAPPUTTY, MEKKATTIL HOUSE,KOTTALA P.O., MUDIKKODE, THRISSUR. 2. K.S.BASHEER, S/O.ZAIDHU MUHAMMED, KARAPPAM VEETTIL HOUSE, KOOTTLA.P.O., MUDIKLKODE, THRISSUR. BY THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10/06/2008,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: M.N. KRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = M.A.C.A. NO. 824 OF 2007 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 10th day of June, 2008. 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)2773/01. The insurance company would contend that in the light of the decision in Tilak Singh's case [United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Tilak Singh (2006 (4) SCC 404)], the Company is not bound to indemnify the owner of the vehicle as the claimant was a pillion rider to the vehicle. After hearing the learned counsel for the appellant and on perusal of the award I find that no contention has been raised regarding the non coverage of the pillion rider which is a fact which has to be proved by adducing evidence. At the belated stage, in appeal, such a contention cannot be allowed to be raised. Therefore I am not inclined to entertain the appeal and hence the MACA is dismissed and the amendment application will also stand dismissed. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. ul/-