The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd vs Ranjith S. Babu on 19 March, 2010

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

MACA.No. 1953 of 2006()


1. THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. RANJITH S. BABU, S/O. K.K.SURESH BABU,
                       ...       Respondent

2. GENESH G., S/O. GOVINDANKUTTY WARIER,

3. JAISON JOHN, S/O. JOHN,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.GEORGE CHERIAN (THIRUVALLA)

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.N.KRISHNAN

 Dated :19/03/2010

 O R D E R
                      M.N. KRISHNAN, J.
                   ...........................................
                   M.A.C.A.No.1953 OF 2006
                  .............................................
           Dated this the 19th day of March, 2010.

                         J U D G M E N T

This appeal is preferred against the award of the

Claims Tribunal, Muvattupuzha in OP(MV)No.144/2002. The

claimant has been awarded a compensation of Rs.23,700/=

and the insurance company’s contention that the claimant is

not covered by the policy has been negatived by the tribunal.

The tribunal has stated in the award itself that the insurance

company has raised a contention that it is only an act only

policy and that it will not cover the risk of a pillion rider.

2. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the

insurance company that it has moved an application-

I.A.No.5096/2006 to receive the policy but it has not been

considered by the tribunal. The learned counsel made

available before me a photocopy of the petition as well as a

copy of the policy which indicate that it is only an act only

policy. Since the tribunal has not considered that issue and

as it will affect the right of the owner of the vehicle, the

matter requires reconsideration regarding the liability of the

: 2 :
M.A.C.A.No.1953 OF 2006

insurance company and for that purpose, I set aside the

award and remit the case back to the tribunal.

3. In the result, the MACA is partly allowed and the

award under challenge is set aside so far as it relates to the

liability of the insurance company is concerned and the

matter is remitted back to the tribunal for consideration of

the question regarding liability of the insurance company by

permitting all concerned to produce documentary as well as

oral evidence in support of their respective contentions and

then dispose of the matter in accordance with law. Since the

owner has not chosen to appear before this Court, the

insurance company is directed to take out notice to the

owner for a proper disposal of the matter. Parties are

directed to appear before the tribunal on 26.4.2010.

Disposed of accordingly.

M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE

cl

: 3 :
M.A.C.A.No.1953 OF 2006