HIGH COURT OF CHHAmSGARH AT^ILASPUR M.A. (C) No. 86/2008 I^//'1 APPELLANTS CLAIMANT RESPONDENTS Smt. Kamla Bai, Wd/ late Jagdish aged about 26 years Ku. Ranjana, D/o Jagdish aged about 10 years Dilip Kumar, S/o late Jagdish, aged about 8 years Sandeep Kumar, S/o Late Jagdish, aged about 5 years Kuldeep Kumar, S/o Late Jagdish, aged about 2 years Rewaram Chaudhari, S/o Parmodhi, aged about 55 years Smt. Sambai, W/o Rewaram Chaudhari, aged about 52 years No. 2 and 3 minors, through natural guardian mother All residents of viUage Lufa, Chowki Belgahna, tahsil Kota, Distt. Bilaspur (CG) Versys Govind Singh Maravi, S/o Darbari Singh, R/o Qtr. No. M/552, Vikas Nagar, Kusmunda, Distt. Korba (CG) United India Insurance Company Liraited, through Branch Manager,Divisional Office Rajendra Nagar Chowk Tahsil and Distt. Bilaspur (CG) SB:- Hon. Shri N.K. Agarwal, J. PRESENT:- Shri Gouram Khetrapal, Adv. for the appellant. Sushri Seema Saggar Singh, Adv. for respondent no. 1. Shri H.B. Agrawal, Sr. Adv. with Shri Pankaj Singh,Adv. for the respondent No. 2. ORAL ORDER (9-4-2010) 1. This is a claimant's appeal against the award dated 13th September, 2007 passed in Claim Case No. 17/2007 by the AdditionalMo.or Accident Claims Tribunal, Bilaspur. 2. Facts briefly statedare as under:- 3. On 3-11-2006 Jagdish (since deceased) was sitting on ' motorcycle bearing registration No. CG-12/H-8079 as a (^waee 7. 8. pillion rider with Mukutram. Said motorcycle dashed with Mata Choura, as a result of which Jagdish died. The claimants being unfortunate widow, children and parents of the deceased filed application under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 claiming Rs. 4,41,500/- as compensation against the owner and insurer of motorcycle in question. Learned Tribunal on appreciation of the evidence led, material placed and submissions made awarded Rs. 1,99,000/- as compensation to the claimants/appellants on account of accidental death of deceased Jagdish exonerating the Insurance Company from its liability to pay compensation by holding the deceased i.e. pillion rider is not covered under the policy. Shri Goutam Khetrapal, learned counsel for the appeUants referring to the circular dated 16th November, 2Q09, issued by the Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority, would contend that since the policy is package policy which covers the risk of pillion rider, therefore, leamed Tribunal has erred in exonerating the Insurance Company from its liability to pay compensation to the claimants. Shri H.B. Agrawal, Sr. Counsel appearing for the respondent No. 2/Insurance Company on the other hand would contend that learned court below has rightly exonerated the Insurance Company from its liability to pay compensation, however applicability of the circular referred to by Shri PChetrapal is not disputed. I have heard leamed counsel for fhe parties and perused the record of the Tribunal as also the impugned award and the circular dated 16th November, 2009. The circular dated 16U1 November, 2009 issued by the Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority reads as under:- ...:'A, '^!i, •i ^•^^Vh. ! ,: r^y^ '\ ••^.^ '"'?"•'' -.-¥•'' sss^w "To CEOs of all General Insurance Companies Re: Liabilities of Insurance Companies in respect of occupant of a private Car and Kllion Rider in a Two-Wheeler under standard Motor Package Policy (also called Comprehensive Policy). Insurer's attention is drawn to wordings of Section (II) l(i) of Standard Motor Package Policy (also called Comprehensive Policy) for private Car and Two Wheelers under the (erstwhile) India Motor Tariff For convenience the relevant provisions are reproduced hereunder: "Section II-Liability to Third Parties 1. Subject to the limits of liability as laid down in the Schedule hereto the Company will indemnify the insured in the event of an accident caused by or arising out of the use of the insured vehicle against all sums which the insured shall become legally liable to pay in respect of- (i) death or bodily injury to any person including occupants carried in the vehicle (provided such occupants are not carried for hire or reward) but except so far as it is necessary to meet the requirements of Motor Vehicles Act, the Company shall not be liable where such death or injury arises out of and in the course of employment of such person by the insured." It is further brought to fhe attention of insurers that the above provisions are in line with the following circiilars earlier issued by the Traffic Advisoiy Committee on the subject : (i) Circular M.V. No. 1 of 1978-dated 18* March 1978 (regarding occupants carried in Private Car) effective from 25th March 1977. (ii) MOT/GEN/10 dated 2nd June, 1986 (regarding Pillion I?iders in a Two Wheeler) efFective from the date of the circular. The above circulars make it clear that the Insured's liability in respect of occupant (s) carried in a private Car and Pillion Rider carried on Two Wheeler is covered under the Standard Motor Package Policy. A- copy of each of the above circiilars is enclosed for ready reference. The authority vide circular No. 066/IRDA/F&U/Mar-08 dated March 26, 2008 issued under File & Use Guidelines has reiterated that pending furfher orders the insures shall not \' i' -<<?'•: .' ^^f- ^y^ -:-^ Ity ^^ ~IK-K- vary the coverage, terms and conditions wordings, warranties, clauses and endorsements in respect of covers that were under the erstwhile tariffs. Further, the Authority, vide circular No. 019/IRDA/NL/F85U/Oct-08 dated November 6, 2008 has mandated that insurers are not permitted to abridge the scope of standards covers available under the erstwhile tariffs beyond the options permitted in the erstwhile tariffs. All General Insurers are advised to adhere to the aforementioned circulars and any non- compliance of the same would be viewed seriously by the Aufhority. This is issued with the approval of Competent Authority. Sd/- Executive Director" 10. 11 12, As per the above circular, the risk of pillion rider is covered under the policy of insurance issued in the instant case. Therefore, leamed Tribunal went wrong in exonerating the Insurance Company from its UabiUty to pay compensation to the claimants. Therefore, the appeal is atlowed in part. The respondent No. 2/ United India Irisurance Company Limited is also held responsible for payment of compensation to the claimants jointly and severely with respondent No. 1. The respondent No. 2/United India Insurance Company Limited is granted three months time from today for deposit of compensation. The amount of award shall carry 7% interest from the date of application till its payment as awarded by the Tribunal. No order as to costs. Sd/- N.K. Agrawal Judge