IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI FRIDAY, THE 29TH OCTOBER 2010 / 7TH KARTHIKA 1932 MACA.No. 846 of 2004 ------------------------------------ OPMV.904/1997 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, THALASSERY .................... APPELLANT(S): APPELLANT/PETITIONER: ----------------------------------------------------------------- V.NASSAR, S/O. KUTTI HASSAN, AGED 27 YEARS, VAZHAYIL HOUSE, P.O.ULIYIL, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.GRASHIOUS KURIAKOSE RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS 1 TO 3 & SUPPL.RESPONDENTS 4 TO 6: --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. BASHEER, S/O. HASSAN, PARAYIL HOUSE, P.O.EDAPAZHASSI. 2. HASSAN, S/O. POCKERKUTTY, PARAYIL HOUSE, P.O.URUVACHAL (DIED) 3. THE NATIONAL INSURANCE CO.LTD., THALASSERY. 4. K.V.ALEEMA S/O. POCKER, PARAYIL HOUSE, P.O.URUVACHAL. 5. MUNEER, S/O. HASSAN, PARAYIL HOUSE, P.O.URUVACHAL. 6. RASHEED S/O. HASSAN, PARAYIL HOUSE, P.O.URUVACHAL. ADV. SMT.SARAH SALVY FOR R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 29/10/2010, ALONG WITH MACA NO.822 OF 2004, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: A.K.BASHEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - M.A.C.A.Nos.822 & 846 OF 2004 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 29th day of October 2010 JUDGMENT Basheer, J. These two appeals are directed against a common award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Thalasery on the two claim petitions filed by the appellants under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act. After quantifying the amount of compensation receivable by the appellants, the Tribunal exonerated the insurance company since it was found that the appellants were gratuitous passengers. Indisputably the appellants were travelling in the Goods Vehicle at the time of the accident. The Tribunal found that there was no satisfactory evidence to show that they were accompanying their goods. Further, it was also found by the Tribunal that the policy in question was an “Act only” policy. 2. We have carefully perused the lower court records, particularly the policy referred to above. In our view, the award passed by the Tribunal does not call for any interference on the question of liability of the insurance company since the terms of the policy are unambiguous and there is no evidence on record to show that the appellants were accompanying their goods in the goods vehicle in question. As regards quantum also, we do not find any reason to interfere since in our view, the Tribunal has awarded just and reasonable compensation. For the above reasons, the two appeals are liable to be dismissed. We do so. A.K.BASHEER, JUDGE P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JUDGE jes