IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.PADMANABHAN NAIR FRIDAY, THE 18TH JANUARY 2008 / 28TH POUSHA 1929 MFA.No. 1280 of 2002(A) ----------------------------------- OPMV.1015/1998 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, MUVATTUPUZHA .................... APPELLANT: 3RD RESPONDENT -------------------------------------------- ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., MUVATTUPUZHA, REPRESENTED BY DEPUTY MANAGER, REGIONAL OFFICE, ERNAKULAM NORTH, KOCHI-18 BY ADV. SRI.GEORGE CHERIAN (THIRUVALLA) SRI.ALEXY AUGUSTINE RESPONDENTS: CLAIMANT/ RESPONDENT 1 AND 2 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- (*)1. ABRAHAM S/O. PAILY, PARUVELIKUDY HOUSE, KADATHY KARA, VELLOORKUNNAM VILLAGE. (DIED. LRS IMPLEADED) 2. THOMAS P.O., ROME NIVAS, COLLEGE ROAD, MUVATTUPUZHA. 3. RAJESH MATHEW S/O. MATHAI, PARUVELIKUDY, MEKKADAMPU KARA, VALAKOM VILLAGE. ADDL.RESPONDENTS: 4. ALEYAMMA ABRAHAM, W/O.LATE ABRAHAM PAILY, PARUVELIKKUDY (H), KADATHY, MEKKADAMPU P.O., MUVATTUPUZHA. 5. SANTHOSH P.A., S/O.LATE ABRAHAM PAILY, -DO- -DO- 6. SOUMYA ABRAHAM, D/O. -DO- -DO- -DO- 7. SAJI ABRAHAM, S/O.-DO--DO- -DO- (LRS OF THE DECEASED FIRST RESPONDENT ARE IMPLEADED AS ADDL.RESPONDENTS 4 TO 7 VIDE ORDER DATED 12.12.2007 ON I.A.NO.2136/2007. R4 TO R7 BY ADV. SRI.H.SIVARAMAN SRI.MATHEW CHERIAN THIS MISC. FIRST APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K. PADMANABHAN NAIR ,J. ------------------------------------------------- M.F.A.No.1280 of 2002 ------------------------------------------------- Dated, this the 18th day of January, 2008 JUDGMENT The third respondent in O.P.(MV) No.1015/1998 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Muvattupuzha is the appellant. This appeal is filed against an award passed by the Tribunal directing the appellant to deposit the compensation awarded in the case. First respondent filed the Original Petition claiming compensation alleging that he sustained injuries in a motor vehicle accident occurred on 26.6.1998 involving a scooter bearing registration No.KBF 4513. The first respondent was a pillion rider in the scooter. It was averred that while the first respondent was standing on the side of the road the third respondent came there riding a scooter and offered a trip. When the first respondent got on the back seat of the scooter the third respondent had ridden the vehicle in a rash or negligent manner and caused the accident. First respondent filed the Original Petition impleading the owner, rider and insurer of the vehicle. The owner and rider did not file written statement or contest the matter. Insurer alone contested the matter. Negligence alleged was denied. Quantum of compensation claimed was disputed. It was contended that the first respondent himself was riding the scooter and accident occurred due to his own negligence. It was further contended that even accepting the case of the first respondent that he was a pillion rider the appellant insurer is not liable to indemnify the insured in this case as the policy MFA No.1280/2002 2 issued was an 'Act only' policy which will not cover the risk of a pillion rider. Tribunal found that the vehicle was ridden by the third respondent and first respondent is entitled to get compensation. Insurer is directed to deposit the amount awarded. Challenging that part of the award by which the appellant was directed to deposit the compensation awarded, this appeal is filed. 2. During the pendency of the appeal the first respondent died and his legal representatives were impleaded. Even accepting the case of the first respondent in toto, he was a pillion rider. Appellant produced a certified copy of the policy, which is marked as Ext.B1. It is only an 'Act only' policy. So, even if the case of the deceased first respondent/petitioner is accepted in toto, the appellant insurer is not liable to indemnify the insured in this case. So that part of the award is to be modified. In the result, appeal is allowed in part. The findings of the Tribunal that the accident occurred due to the negligence of the rider of the scooter and the first respondent/petitioner is entitled to get a compensation of Rs.38,840/- are confirmed. But the direction to the appellant insurer to pay the compensation is set aside. It is held that the appellant is not liable to indemnify the insured. It is made clear that the award in respect of the other respondents is not interfered with. MFA No.1280/2002 3 I.A.No.7656/2002 in M.F.A.No.1280/2002 will stand dismissed. K. PADMANABHAN NAIR, JUDGE. cks MFA No.1280/2002 4 K.PADMANABHAN NAIR, J. M.F.A.No.1280 of 2002 JUDGMENT 18th January, 2008.