High Court Kerala High Court

Shyamala Balu vs Oriental Insurance Co.Ltd on 6 April, 2010

Kerala High Court
Shyamala Balu vs Oriental Insurance Co.Ltd on 6 April, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

MACA.No. 1692 of 2008()


1. SHYAMALA BALU, W/O.LATE BALAU AGED 42
                      ...  Petitioner
2. DHANYA.B, D/O.LATE BALU AGED 23 YEARS..

                        Vs



1. ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO.LTD, BRANCH OFFICE
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.V.K.GOPALAKRISHNA PILLAI

                For Respondent  :SRI.VPK.PANICKER

The Hon'ble MR. Justice A.K.BASHEER
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.Q.BARKATH ALI

 Dated :06/04/2010

 O R D E R
           A.K.BASHEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ.
                    -----------------------------------
                   M.A.C.A.No.1692 OF 2008
                   ------------------------------------
             Dated this the 6th day of April, 2010

                          J U D G M E N T

~~~~~~~~~~~

Basheer, J.

The appellants are the wife and daughter of deceased

Balu, who succumbed to the injuries sustained in a motor

accident. The appellants claimed compensation from the owner

and insurer of the two wheeler in which deceased Balu was

travelling as a pillion rider when the accident took place.

2. The Tribunal, after considering the oral and

documentary evidence on record, found that the appellants are

entitled to get a sum of Rs.10,59,350/- towards compensation.

Since the policy in respect of the two wheeler was only an “Act

Only Policy”, the Tribunal found that respondent No.2,

Insurance Company, would not be liable to indemnify the owner

of the vehicle involved in the accident. Accordingly,

respondent No.2, Insurance Company, was exonerated and

respondent No.1, owner, was directed to pay the compensation

M.A.C.A.No.1692/2008 2

to the appellants. The said finding is challenged by the

appellants in this appeal.

3. Learned counsel for the appellants fairly concedes

that, going by the nature of the policy, the finding of the Tribunal

cannot be faulted. We have also perused the copy of the policy,

which is made available to us. It is evident that the policy is an

“Act Only Policy”. It is seen that no additional premium was

collected by the Insurance Company for the pillion rider.

Therefore, the view taken by the Tribunal is legally valid.

We do not find any reason to interfere with the above

finding entered by the Tribunal. The appeal fails and it is

accordingly dismissed.

(A.K.BASHEER, JUDGE)

(P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JUDGE)
ps