IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 6TH OCTOBER 2009 / 14TH ASWINA 1931 MACA.No. 597 of 2009() --------------------------------- OPMV.3285/2002 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, THRISSUR .................... APPELLANT/3RD RESPONDENT --------------------------------------------- UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD., SIMIS COMPLEX, KURUPPAM ROAD, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.P.V.JYOTHI PRASAD RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER & RESPONDENTS 1 & 2 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. RADHAKRISHNAN, S/O.DEVAN, PULIPARAMBIL, AKG LANE, CHAKKAMUKKU P.O., POONKUNNAM, THRISSUR. 2. SHIJU. A.T., S/O.THAMBI, AMMANCHERY HOUSE, KOODAPUZHA, CHALAKUDY. 3. SUJITH. A.S., S/O.A.V.SOMAN, AREKATTIL HOUSE, CHAKKAMUKKU, P.O.POONKUNNAM, THRISSUR. BY THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: MACA.No. 597 of 2009 ORDER ON I.A. NO.740/2009 IN MACA NO.597/2009 DISMISSED 06/10/2009. SD/- M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE rs. M.N. KRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = M.A.C.A. NO. 597 OF 2009 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 6th day of October, 2009. J U D G M E N T This appeal is preferred against the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Thrissur in O.P.(MV)3285/02. The Tribunal after consideration of the materials granted an award of Rs.77,000/- and directed the insurance company to pay the amount. Aggrieved by the said decision the insurance company has come up in appeal. In spite of notice none of the respondents had entered appearance in this appeal. Therefore the matter is considered by the Court after hearing the counsel for the appellant. I find that a strange interpretation is given by the learned Tribunal in interpreting the Act only policy. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the decision reported in Tilak Singh's case [United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Tilak Singh)2006 (2) KLT 884(SC) had considered the question of an Act only policy. An Act only policy means a policy which covers the risk of persons compulsorily as provided by the statute. Nobody M.A.C.A. 597 OF 2009 -:2:- can avoid a statutory policy if one wants to ply the vehicle along the road. In such a policy suppose some premium is paid for covering the property damage to a third party, it is too unfortunate to hold that it is an extended policy which will cover the risk of a pillion rider. An Act only policy means only relating to a third party and as per the dictum laid down in Tilak Singh's case, the status of a pillion rider in a motorbike is that of a gratuitous passenger and not a third party. Therefore by any stretch of imagination one cannot hold that the Act only policy covers the risk of a pillion rider in the light of the enunciated principles in Tilak Singh's case. Therefore the finding of the Tribunal is not proper and it is liable to be set aside and I do so. In the result the MACA is allowed and it is declared that the insurance company is not liable to indemnify the owner and it is totally exonerated from the liability. The claimant is at liberty to proceed against the respondents 1 and 2 in the claim petition for recovery of the amount ordered by the Tribunal. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. ul/-