IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 5TH AUGUST 2008 / 14TH SRAVANA 1930 M.A.C.A.No. 1662 of 2007(D) ----------------------- OPMV.550/2000 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, PALAKKAD .................... APPELLANT/3RD RESPONDENT IN THE OP(MV): ------------------------------------------------------------------- THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPNAY LTD, MUVATTUPUZHA, REPRSENTED BY THE AUTHORISED SIGNATORY, THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD, REGIONAL OFFICE, METRO PALACE,ERNAKULAM NORTH, KOCHI-18. BY ADV. SRI.A.R.GEORGE RESPONDENTS/CLAIMANT & RESPONDENTS 1&2 IN THE OP(MV): -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. PONNU, S/O.PALLI,PALLIPPARAMBU VEEDU, VANDAZHI POST, ALATHUR TALUK,PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 2. M.PAREETHU, S/O.MUHAMMED,THOPPIL VEEDU, 161A.VII, PUMMAMMATTAM,MUVATTUPUZHA WEST, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 3. RAJAN, S/O.KITTU,PALLIKKAVU VEEDU, PARUVASSERY POST, VADAKENCHERRY, ALATHUR TALUK,PALAKKAD. BY ADVS SRI.RAJESH SIVARAMANKUTTY FOR R1 SRI.N.ANILKUMAR FOR R2-3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 05/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: M.N. KRISHNAN, J ---------------------- M.A.C.A. No. 1662 OF 2007 ------------------------------- Dated this the 5th day of August, 2008 J U D G M E N T This appeal is preferred against the award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Palakkad in O.P.(MV) No. 550/2000. The claimant sustained injuries in a road accident. The Tribunal quantified the compensation at Rs. 77,500/-. Insurance Company is directed to pay the amount. Aggrieved by that decision, the Insurance Company has come up in appeal. The Insurance Company has specifically raised a contention that in para 6 of the written statement that the policy does not cover the risk of the petitioner and unauthorised occupants in the vehicle. The police records and the claim petition reveal that the petitioner and others were travelling in the lorry at the time of the alleged accident. It is contended that the petitioner was not travelling in the vehicle as the owner of the goods or representative of the owner of the goods. But unfortunately, the Tribunal did not raise a specific issue in considering that question. It is well settled principle that after the amendment by Act 54 of 1994 laid down in New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Asha Rani & others in 2003(1)KLT 165(SC), a person M.A.C.A.No. 1662/07 -2- travelling in a goods vehicle as the owner of the goods or representative of the owner of the goods would be covered by an Insurance policy. It is also held in many other cases that if a person is travelling as a gratuitous passenger, then the Insurance Company may not be liable at all. There may be cases were extra premium is collected to cover the risk of two or three persons. These are all matters that requires factual and legal consideration. Therefore without expressing anything on merit, I remit back the case to the Tribunal for the purpose of considering the liability of the Insurance Company and the owner. All the parties are permitted to adduce both documentary and oral evidence in support of their respective contentions and the matter be decided in accordance with law thereafter. Parties are directed to appear before the Tribunal on 16.09.2008. The amount deposited will be retained by the Tribunal and it shall be disbursed to the party who is entitled to the amount thereafter. The registry shall sent back the lower court records immediately. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. vkm