IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MACA.No. 1303 of 2009()
1. THE NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. PRESSY, AGED 27 YEARS,
... Respondent
2. SANTHOSH, AGED 28 YEARS,
3. K.N.JAYAKUMAR,
For Petitioner :SMT.RAJI T.BHASKAR
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.N.KRISHNAN
Dated :28/01/2010
O R D E R
M.N. KRISHNAN, J.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = =
M.A.C.A. NO. 1303 OF 2009
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Dated this the 28th day of January, 2010.
J U D G M E N T
This appeal is preferred against the award of the Motor
Accidents Claims Tribunal, Thrissur in O.P.(MV)525/02. The
Tribunal has awarded a compensation of Rs.30,500/- and
directed the insurance company to pay the amount. It is
against that decision the insurance company has come up in
appeal challenging the liability.
2. Though respondents are served they have not
entered appearance. Heard the learned counsel for the
appellant. The short point that arises for determination in
the appeal is whether in an Act only policy the insurance
company can be directed to pay the amount. Strangely I find
that the Claims Tribunal has taken a stand that since
additional premium is paid for coverage of unlimited property
damages to third parties it will take in the pillion rider as well
and so the insurance company is liable. It has to be stated
M.A.C.A. 1303 OF 2009
-:2:-
that the said approach is totally incorrect and cannot stand
the scrutiny of law. By virtue of the Circular dated
16.11.2009 of the Insurance Regulatory and Development
Authority, it has clarified that risk of persons travelling in a
private vehicle or pillion riders travelling in a two wheeler are
only covered by the terms and conditions issued by a
Standard Motor Package Policy. So it is only the package
policy which contains the clause. So far as an Act only policy
policy is concerned the very specific condition that the words
‘any person carried in a vehicle other than for hire or reward’
will be significantly absent. Therefore an Act only policy
cannot cover the risk of such persons. That is what has been
precisely considered and decided by the Apex Court in Tilak
Singh’s case [United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Tilak
Singh)2006 (2) KLT 884(SC) and the status of any person
referred to in the policy cannot be extended to a pillion rider
or a passenger travelling in a private vehicle and therefore
the status is only that of a gratuitous passenger. Therefore
the award passed by the Tribunal fixing the liability on the
insurance company is incorrect and therefore it is set aside.
M.A.C.A. 1303 OF 2009
-:3:-
Therefore the MACA is allowed and the finding of the
Tribunal making the insurance company liable is set aside. It
is exonerated from the liability and it is made clear that the
claimant can proceed against the other respondents 1 and 2
in the claim petition jointly and severally for the realisation
of the amount awarded by the Tribunal.
M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE.
ul/-