IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 9TH DECEMBER 2008 / 18TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 MACA.No. 1462 of 2007() ---------------------------------- OPMV.3545/2001 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, THRISSUR .................... APPELLANT/RESPONDENT NO.3 ----------------------------------------------- M/S. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD., DIVISIONAL OFFICE, THRISSUR, NOW REPRESENTED BY ITS ASSISTANT MANAGER, AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY, REGIONAL OFFICE, SHARANYA, HOSPITAL ROAD, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI.11 BY ADV. SRI.S.MAMMU RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER AND RESPONDENTS NO.1 & 2 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. MANIKANTAN, S/O.VELAYUDHAN, KUMBALAKODE HOUSE, P.O.KARIMKULAM, (VIA) NENARA, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 2. SELVARAJAN, ANNA NAGAR, 10/107, KANUVAI, COIMBATHORE. 3. PRABHAKARAN, S/O.MADHAVAN, KUMBALANGAD, ELAVANCHERY, PALAKKAD. BY THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/12/2008,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Rs/ M.N.KRISHNAN, J ===================== MACA No.1462 OF 2007 ===================== Dated this the 9th day of December 2008 JUDGMENT When the matter came up for admission, I requested the learned counsel for the appellant to make available before me for perusal a copy of the written statement filed by the insurance company in this case. He had submitted the same for perusal. I do not find a single sentence in the written statement wherein the word 'Act only policy' is used. The contention appears to be that it was a self-accident and so the insurance company is not bound to indemnify. Now what is attempted to be raised is that the claimant was a pillion rider and as the vehicle was covered only by Act only policy and so in the light of the dictum laid down in United India Insurance Co.Ltd. v. Tilak Singh and others(2006(4) SCC 404) the status of that person will be that of a gratuitous passenger not covered by the policy. Unfortunately the insurance company has not raised such a contention. Further, the insurance company has not even produced. Copy of the policy or it has let in any evidence in support of that contention. But, it appears that the petitioner had produced a copy of the policy. Whatever it may be, a MACA 1462/2007 -:2:- matter which is not pleaded cannot be considered and therefore in the absence of any pleading I decline to interfere with the decision rendered by the Tribunal. Therefore the appeal lacks merit and the same is dismissed. M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE Cdp/-