IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID MONDAY, THE 3RD NOVEMBER 2008 / 12TH KARTHIKA 1930 MACA.No. 368 of 2003() ---------------------- OPMV.1510/1994 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, IRINJALAKUDA .................... APPELLANT: APPELLANT/3RD RESPONDENT: --------------------------------------- THE BRANCH MANAGER, NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, SANKARI NOW REPRESENTED BY ITS DEPUTY MANAGER, REGIONAL OFFICE, AJAI VIHAR, KOCHI-16. BY ADV. SRI.MATHEWS JACOB (SR.) RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONERS AND RESPONDENTS 1 AND 2: --------------------------------------------------- 1. GEETHA, W/O. LATE JAMES, PUTHENVEEDU HOUSE, VARAKKARA DESOM, AMBALLOOR VILLAGE, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK. 2. VARGHESE, DO. DO. 3. ELSY, W/O. VARGHESE, DO. DO. 4. PAZHANI, S/O. GANAPATHY, KOTTAPATHY, KAKKUMKARA P.O., POTHUMKARA TALUK, KARMAPURI DISTRICT, TAMIL NADU. 5. M. THANGAVEL, S/O. MUTHUSWAMY, ALINGI THOTTAM, IRUGAUR P.O., SANKARI TALUK, TAMIL NADU. THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: ORDER IN I.A. NO.1269 OF 2003 IN M.A.C.A NO. 368 OF 2003 DISMISSED SD/- C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE 3.11.2008 SD/- HARUN-UL-RASHID, JUDGE es C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & HARUN-UL-RASHID, JJ. ----------------------------------------- M.A.C.A No. 368 of 2003 ----------------------------------------- Dated this the 3rd day of November , 2008 JUDGMENT Ramachandran Nair .J, This appeal is remained defective for failure of service of notice on respondents. The original claimant died so his wife and children are the respondents. The senior counsel appearing for the Insurance Company submitted that the award of the M.A.C.T. is not tenable because the victim was a gratuitous passenger in a tipper lorry along with other passengers at the time of the accident. He is also relied on the decision of the Supreme Court reported in New India Assurance Co.Ltd Vs.Asharani 2003 (1) 165SC. We are of the view that prima facie the award is not tenable because the victim was not entitled to compensation on account of the injury suffered in an accident while travelling in a goods vehicle. Further we noticed that the award for only Rs. 15,000/- out of which Rs. 7,500/- was already deposited by the Insurance Company. Probably this amount might have already released by the M.A.C.T. to the legal heirs of the deceased claimant. Considering all these facts and following the decision of the Supreme Court in Asharani's case(Supra) we modify the award by reducing the compensation amount from 15,000/- to Rs. 7,500/-. This appeal is allowed to the above extent. (C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR,JUDGE) (HARUN-UL-RASHID, JUDGE) es C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & HARUN-UL-RASHID, JJ. --------------------------- M.A.C.A. No. 368 of 2003 ---------------------------- JUDGMENT 3rd November, 2008