High Court Kerala High Court

Eldhose Mathew vs Wilson Thomas on 30 July, 2008

Kerala High Court
Eldhose Mathew vs Wilson Thomas on 30 July, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

MACA.No. 295 of 2003()


1. ELDHOSE MATHEW, AGED 25 YEARS,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. WILSON THOMAS, CHITTADIYIL HOUSE,
                       ...       Respondent

2. P.B.SASI, PUTHENPURAYIL HOUSE,

3. ORIENTED INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.B.SAINU

                For Respondent  :SRI.C.K.VIDYASAGAR

The Hon'ble MR. Justice C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice V.K.MOHANAN

 Dated :30/07/2008

 O R D E R
                 C .N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR &
                         V.K. MOHANAN, JJ.
                 --------------------------------------------
                     M.A.C.A. No. 295 OF 2003
                 --------------------------------------------
                Dated this the 30th day of July, 2008

                               JUDGMENT

Ramachandran Nair,J.

This appeal is filed by the claimant who got an award for

Rs.2,45,506/- against respondents 1 and 2 who are owner and driver of

the mini vehicle involved in the accident. The main prayer in the

appeal is for a direction to the insurance company to pay the

compensation awarded. However, counsel for the insurance company

submitted that appellant-claimant was a gratuitous passenger in a goods

vehicle and under the decision of the Supreme Court relied on by the

Tribunal, insurance company is not liable to pay any compensation to a

gratuitous passenger in a goods vehicle unless he was accompanying

his goods. Even though appellant attempted to prove that he was

accompanying goods, namely, pepper, the appellant’s case was found to

be bogus based on evidence and contents of FI statement given by

another person who was a similar passenger in the vehicle at the time

2

of the accident. We find no ground to interfere with the award of

Tribunal exonerating the insurance company as appeallant was not

accompanying the goods as claimed by him. So far as the prayer for

enhancement of compensation is concerned, we find the award is quite

reasonable warranting no interference. Appeal is accordingly

dismissed.

(C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR)
Judge.

(V. K. MOHANAN)
Judge.

kk

3