IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 14TH JULY 2008 / 23RD ASHADHA 1930 MACA.No. 64 of 2007() -------------------------------- OPMV.1128/1996 of MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, MAVELIKKARA .................... APPELLANT/2ND RESPONDENT ----------------------------------------- THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LTD., REP. BY THE DEPUTY MANAGER, REGIONAL OFFICE, M.G.ROAD, KOCHI-11. BY ADV. SRI.P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON RESPONDENTS - RESPONDENTS: -------------------------------------------- 1. T.R.GOPI, S/O.RAGHAVAN, THADATHIL KIZHAKKETHIL, AKKANATTUKARA MURI, KALLUMALA P.O., MAVELIKKARA. 2. M.M.ABRAHAM, S/O.MATHEW MATHEW, DAD BRUSH INDUSTRIES, AKKANATTUKARA MURI, KALLUMALA P.O., MAVELIKKARA. BY ADV. SRI.N.SURESH FOR R1 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ORDER ON I.A. NO. 61 OF 2007 IN M.A.C.A. .NO. 64 OF 2007 DISMISSED. 14.7.2008 ID/- M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. vsv M.N.KRISHNAN, J ===================== MACA No.64 OF 2007 ===================== Dated this the 14th day of July 2008 JUDGMENT This appeal is preferred by the insurance company against the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Mavelikkara in O.P.(MV)No.1128 of 1996. The Tribunal awarded a compensation of Rs.50,700/- and directed the insurance company to deposit the amount and seek reimbursement after satisfaction of the award from the first respondent in the case. It is against that decision the present appeal is preferred by the insurance company. 2. Heard the counsel for the insurance company. Service on R1 and R2 is complete and R1 has entered appearance by filing vakalath through counsel. It can be seen from paragraph 6 of the written statement, which is made available before me that there is a specific contention “this respondent is not liable to pay any amount to the petitioner as he was a pillion rider at the time of the accident”. Suppose the policy issued is only an Act only policy and additional premium has not been paid to cover the pillion rider necessarily insurance company will not be liable to pay the amount at all and therefore they may have to be totally exonerated from the liability and MACA 64/2007 -:2:- the question of payment and recovery will not arise. But, unfortunately, the Tribunal below had lost sight of that contention and had never considered the same. It requires consideration especially in the light of the authoritative pronouncement by the Apex Court in Tilak Singh's case(2006(2)KLT 884 (SC). Therefore, the award under challenge is set aside in toto and the matter is remitted back to the Tribunal for fresh consideration. The Tribunal is directed to consider whether Ext.B1 policy is only an Act only policy and whether it does not cover a pillion rider and thereafter applying the dictum laid down in Thilak Singh's case decide the case in accordance with law. The insurance company is directed to take out notice to the owner and the claimant since their rights are affected in the case as they are not properly represented before this Court. Parties are directed to appear before the court below on 25.8.2008. MACA is disposed of as above. M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE Cdp/-