IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 4TH JUNE 2008 / 14TH JYAISHTA 1930 MACA.No. 1717 of 2006(F) ------------------------------------- (AGAINST THE AWARD DATED 20/04/2005 IN O.P.(MV).NO. 1657/2001 OF THE M.A.C.T, MUVATTUPUZHA) ................... APPELLANT/ 3RD RESPONDENT: ------------------------------------------------ THE OREINTAL INSURANCE CO.LTD., KOTHAMANGALAM, REPRESETNED BY ITS ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER, REGIONAL OFFICE, ERNAKULAM NORTH, KOCHI-18. BY ADV. SRI.GEORGE CHERIAN (THIRUVALLA). RESPONDENTS/ CLAIMANT: ----------------------------------------- 1. BIJU. K.J., S/O. KUNJAPPAN, RESIDING AT KALARICKAL HOUSE, THRIKKARIYOOR P.O., AYAKKADU, KOTHAMANGALAM. 2. K.S. VARGHESE, B.NO.1389, OPERATOR GR.NO.1, HIL UDYOGAMANDAL. 3. SIJO.K.J., S/O. JOSEPH, KALARICKAL HOUSE, AYAKKADU, THRIKKARIYOOR, KOTHAMANGALAM. BY ADV. SRI.C.A.CHACKO - R2. THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.A.C.A. NO. 1717/2006-F: ORDER ON I.A. NO. 1954/2006 IN M.A.C.A. NO. 1717/2006 DISMISSED 04/06/2008. SD/- M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE. //TRUE COPY// prv. M.N. KRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = M.A.C.A. NO. 1717 OF 2006 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 4th day of June, 2008. J U D G M E N T This appeal is preferred against the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Muvattupuzha in O.P.(MV) 1657/01. It is an appeal mainly on the question of liability of the insurance company to indemnify the owner. It is the case of the appellant that the claimant in the above case was a pillion rider and only there was an Act only policy which did not cover the pillion rider and therefore the insurance company is not liable to indemnify in view of the decision reported in Tilak Singh's case [United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Tilak Singh (2006 (4) SCC 404)]. The learned counsel for the insurance company has brought to my notice paragraph 5 of the written statement wherein there is a specific pleading to that effect. But the Tribunal has not considered this aspect at all and therefore the matter requires reconsideration at the hands of the Court below. Therefore the award under challenge is set aside as M.A.C.A. 1717 OF 2006 -:2:- to the extend of its liability on the insurance company and the Tribunal is directed to consider whether the insurance company is liable to pay the amount in view of the categoric averments in paragraph 5 of the written statement. All parties are permitted to adduce evidence before the Court and in case of production of documentary evidence, also to produce the same. Parties are directed to appear before the Tribunal on 21.7.08. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. ul/-