IN THIS FHGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT ESANGALORE DATED THIS THE 29"" DAY OF JANUARY. BEFORE THE HONBLE MR.JUsT1c1a: A.N.VENUGOPA1.;A*CzOW'E)A 'A '= M.F.A.NO. 1 141 /2008, A 4' BETWEEN: M/S ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED ._ 5 W NO.99 SR] I\/iUT'i'BUlI,Dl1\IOC. < A} 11 MAIN ROAD '- ' MALLESHWARAM _ . BANGALORE; NOW REP. BY"»lTS'l;_R_EGI(;-NA_.l, Of'R1CE . No.44/45. 1L1:O"~3.RORR|N'<:;j VACGMPLEX REs1OEN'OY"VROA::g.v_' * " BANGALOREQ. _ _ REP. By 11:3 AU'TE~'iQR£ZED"S_lGNA'I'ORY . . APPELLANT [By syn' A M v:«:N:§Ai"15srAA1) !~' 1.
‘ . M C H fME’RAREEsH
as/O’ LITE M H CHANDRASHEKAR
AGED ABOUT 30 YRS
O T R/AT MATHIKERE VILLAGE
A WMALUR HOBLI
* CHANNAPATNA TQ
BANGALORE RURAL ms?
SR1 SURYANANDA REDDY
S / O VENKATESI-IA REDDY
AGED ABOUT 30 YRS
LA}
contending that. the tribunal has erred in not noticing that.
no additional premium was collected by appellant…to._eQVer
the risk of a pillion rider and hence, it. is not .
the risk of a third party.
3. The said conteratioriiwas eo”n_test.ed b”‘the 1earned_
counsel for the claimant. for the
Claimanv 192 ;*espondei1;:t.”e1a1delnslobfniswsvyions in slnobort. of the
conclusion arrived atthe impugned
JUdgflififll./aV\tEil’tii’:VhE’
4. liritelw and Regulatoiy and
DeVeIooi1ie11.t V bearing reference
No.1RoA/NL’/e’1r~z_/ii}. 8:, 0/073/11/2009 or November. 16
the weont.enti’or:’Vurged by the learned Counsel for
not. hold good. The policy being indisputedly
alepaekagelfioieley. appellant is liable to satisfy the award
passed in3_1*espeCt of the person who was a pillion rider in the
fft\2voi”wheeler involved in the accident. Hence, the only
grouncl urged for consideration being untenable. stands
it ” V , ecrted. \e
__/r
..u
As a result. the a13pe2.1] siands dismissed. The amount.
in deposit in this appeal! is ordered 10 be ‘:.rans{‘e1’r€d’idaphe
Tribunal for necessaly action.
KVN*
