IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.KOSHY & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH TUESDAY, THE 19TH AUGUST 2008 / 28TH SRAVANA 1930 MACA.No. 1256 of 2008() ----------------------- OPMV.263/2005 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KASARAGOD .................... APPELLANT:2ND RESPONDENT IN OP(MV)NO.263/05: ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- THE MANAGER, BAJAJ ALLAINZ GENERAL, INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., T.C. 28222(5)A, ANUGRAHA, II FLOOR, M.G. ROAD, PAZHAVANGADI, TRIVANDRUM-695 023, REPRESENTED BY ITS LEGAL EXECUTIVE, AMBILI GEORGE. BY ADV. SRI.LAL GEORGE SRI.R.AJITH KUMAR (128/84) RESPONDENTS: PETITIONERS & 1ST RESPONDENT IN OP(MV)263/05: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. ABDULRAHIMAN HAJI, AGED 55 YEARS, S/O. KUTTY MOOSA. 2. T.K.P. BEEFATHIMA, AGED 4O YEARS, W/O. ABDURAHIMAN HAJI, BOTH ARE RESIDING AT MOUSINA MANZIL, PADANNA THEKKEPURAM, P.O. PADANNA, PADANNA VILLAGE, HOSDURG TALUK. 3. ASNARI THARI MOOPAM, S/O. ABDUL MAJEED, MANGOD, KARDIKKAL HOUSE, NALUVAYAL, P.O KANNUR CITY, KANNUR DISTRICT. ADV. SRI.JAWAHAR JOSE FOR R1 & 2 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss J.B. KOSHY & THOMAS P.JOSEPH, JJ. ------------------------------------------------------------ M.A.C.A.NO: 1256 OF 2008 ----------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 19th August,2008. JUDGMENT The only contention of the appellant-insurance company is that appellant has no liability for a gratuitous passenger as held by the Honourable Supreme Court in United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Tilak Singh {2006(2) KLT 884 SC}. We have gone through the conditions of policy, B policy (Compensation Policy) issued by the appellant in this case. Section II thereof reads as follows:- “1. Subject to the Limits of Liability as laid down in the Schedule hereto, the Company, will indemnify the insured in the event of an accident caused by or arising out of the vehicle, against all sums which the insured shall become legally liable to pay in respect of: i) death of or bodily injury to any person including occupants carried in the vehicle (provided such occupants are not carried for hire or reward) but except so far as it is necessary to meet the requirements of Motor Vehicles Act the Company shall not be liable where such death or injury arises out of and in the course of the employment of such person by the insured.” Here the injured claimant was not travelling in the course of employment and he was also not covered for hire or reward. Here liability is specifically covered in the schedule . In Tilak Singh's case (supra) the Honourable Supreme Court was considering the effect of Act Policy. In New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Jaya {2002 (1) KLT 596 (SC)} and Amrit Lal Sood v. Kaushalya Devi Thapar {(1998) 3 SCC 744} held that liability of the insurance company other than statutory appeal depend upon the MACA 1256/08 2 terms of policy. As per the terms of the policy, which is a contract, appellant who is a gratuitous passenger is covered. The same view was held in the decision reported in New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Hydrose and others {2008(3) ILR Kerala 436} . Hence this appeal is dismissed. J.B.KOSHY Judge THOMAS P. JOSEPH Judge jj K.K.DENESAN & V. RAMKUMAR, JJ. ---------------------------------------------------- M.F.A.NO: ----------------------------------------------------- JUDGMENT Dated: