IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 3RD NOVEMBER 2008 / 12TH KARTHIKA 1930 MACA.No. 3 of 2008() -------------------- OPMV.1205/2003 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, MUVATTUPUZHA .................... APPELLANT/3RD RESPONDENT: ----------------------------- THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., KOTHAMANGALAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS ASSISTANT MANAGER, REGIONAL OFFICE, ERNAKULAM NORTH, KOCHI-18. BY ADV. SRI.GEORGE CHERIAN (THIRUVALLA) RESPONDENTS/CLAIMANT AND RESPONDENTS 1 & 2: ---------------------------------------------- 1. GIGI VARGHESE, S/O.VARGHESE, RESIDING AT CHENAYAPPILLIL HOUSE, PUNLINTHANAM KARA, ENANALLOOR VILLAGE. 2. BIJU GEORGE, S/O.GEORGE, CHETTIYAMKUDIYIL HOUSE, POTHANICADU P.O., KOTHAMANGALAM. 3. GEORGE XAVIER, S/O.XAVIER, VETTIKKATTU HOUSE, POTHANICADU. ADV. SRI.K.JAJU BABU FOR R1 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: MACA No. 3/08 ORDER ON IA No. 4/08 IN MACA No.3/08 DISMISSED 3.11.08 SD/- M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE /TRUE COPY/ PA TO JUDGE. M.N.KRISHNAN, J. -------------------------- M.A.C.A No. 3 OF 2008 --------------------- Dated this the 3rd day of November, 2008 JUDGMENT This appeal is preferred against the award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Muvattupuzha, in OP(MV) 1205/03. The claimant, pillion rider in a motor bike, sustained injuries in a road accident and the Tribunal awarded him a compensation of Rs.22,500/- and directed the Insurance Company to pay the amount. It is against that decision, the Insurance Company has come up in appeal. 2. Learned counsel for the Insurance Company contends that the policy issued is only an Act only policy which does not cover the risk of a pillion rider. It is submitted that in the case on hand, additional coverage for personal accident is taken for the rider as well as the pillion rider and entitlement to compensation on the basis of that premium will arise only if there is a death or permanent disablement as contemplated under law. So far as this case is concerned, there is no death or permanent disablement and therefore the extended premium will not cover the risk of a pillion rider. An amount of Rs.50/- is paid for covering the wider coverage of third party damage. Lastly we find there is an amount of Rs.163.20 is charged as an extra loading. Learned counsel for the Insurance Company explained it to me stating that when premium is renewed, the ratio goes up. There is a MACA No. 3/08 2 practice under the insurance condition to charge extra and that is called extra loading and it is only with respect to the higher percentage for issuance of the policy. It does not relate to any additional coverage or any personal coverage. So that amount of extra loading will not cover a pillion rider. Being an Act only policy and as no additional premium is collected to cover the case of a pillion rider, applying the dictum in United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Tilak Singh [2006 (4) SCC 404] the Insurance Company is not bound to indemnify the owner. It has to be totally exonerated from the liability. Therefore, the appeal is allowed. The award passed by the Tribunal directing the Insurance Company to pay the amount is set aside and the claimant is given liberty to realise the said amount from respondents 1 and 2 in the claim petition jointly and severally. M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE vps MACA No. 3/08 3