IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 12TH JANUARY 2010 / 22TH POUSHA 1931 MACA.No. 2473 of 2009() ----------------------- OPMV.2045/2003 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, NEYYATTINKARA .................... APPELLANT(S): 3RD RESPONDENT: ------------------------------------------------------- UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD., L.M.S.COMPOUND, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. MR.P.V.JYOTHI PRASAD RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONER & RESPONDENTS 1,2 & ADDL.R4: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. K.HARIKUMAR, S/O.KRISHNA PILLAI, KRISHNA VILASAM, PURAVOOR, PALUKAL VILLAGE. 2. S.CHRISTUDAS, S/O.SAMUEL, HOUSE NO.619, MANALIVILAKAM, PULLOORKONAM, PARASSALA. 3. VINCENT.R., S/O.RUSSALAYYAN, MULLUKADE PUTHEN VEEDU, MULLUKADE, PARASUVAIKKAL VILLAGE. 4. R.MOHANAN, KUNNATHU KIZHAKKE PUTHEN VEEDU, MARUTHAMPALLY, POOYAPPALLY P.O., KOTTAR, KANYAKUMARI DISTRICT. R1 BY ADVS. MR.K.RAJESH KANNAN, MR.HARIKUMAR.N. THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss ORDER ON I.A.NO.2889/2009 IN MACA NO.2473/2009 DISMISSED 12/01/2010 SD/- M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE Kss M.N. KRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = M.A.C.A. NO. 2473 OF 2009 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 12th day of January, 2010. J U D G M E N T This appeal is preferred against the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Neyyattinkara in O.P.(MV) 2045/03. This case along with O.P.(MV)2046/03 were tried together and the learned Tribunal had affixed the liability on the insurance company. Against the order in O.P.(MV) 2046/03, MACA 2475/09 was filed and this Court by the judgment dated 30.11.2009 considered the whole issue and found the insurance company is not liable. A perusal of the said judgment would reveal that the persons involved in the accident were passengers in a private car covered by only an Act only policy. When it is only an Act only policy and as the passengers in a private car are not third parties then the status of them will be that of a gratuitous passenger and therefore it will not be covered by an Act only policy. The dictum laid down in Tilak Singh's case [United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Tilak Singh) M.A.C.A. 2473 OF 2009 -:2:- 2006 (2) KLT 884(SC) has to be extended to the facts of this case and when it is so the insurance company cannot be saddled with the liability. This court also found that the policy stands in the name of 4th respondent in the claim petitioner and 2nd respondent is the driver and therefore made respondents 2 and 4 jointly and severally liable to pay the amount. The same thing has to be followed here also and therefore the MACA is allowed and the award passed by the Tribunal fixing the liability on the insurance company is set aside and it is made clear that the claimants can proceed against respondents 2 and 4 jointly and severally for realisation of the amount. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. ul/-