IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 24TH FEBRUARY 2010 / 5TH PHALGUNA 1931 MACA.No. 39 of 2010() --------------------- OPMV.1563/2003 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, MANJERI .................... APPELLANT(S): PETITIONER: -------------------------------------------- SURESH M., S/O.SREEDHARAN, AGED 24 YEARS, MADATHIL HOUSE, KUNNAKAVU P.O., CHERUKARA, ELAMKULAM AMSOM DESOM, PERINTHALMANNA TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADVS. MR.U.K.DEVIDAS, SMT.K.SHERIN MOHAN. RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS: ---------------------------------------------------- 1. GIREESH M., S/O.SREEDHARAN, AGED 26 YEARS, MYKKANAM HOUSE, KUNNAKAVU P.O., CHERUKARA VIA., PERINTHALMANNA TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. (DRIVER) 2. ANIL KUMAR P., S/O.C.K.BNARAYANANKUTTY, ANIL NIVAS, CHEMMALASSERY, PULAMANTHOLE (VIA), MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. (OWNER) 3. THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., BRANCH OFFICE, PERINTHALMANNA. (INSURER) R3 BY ADV. SMT.D.GEETHA THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss M.N. KRISHNAN, J. ........................................... M.A.C.A.No.39 OF 2010 ............................................. Dated this the 24th day of February, 2010. J U D G M E N T This appeal is preferred against the award of the Claims Tribunal, Manjeri in OP(MV)No.1563/200. The claimant a pillion rider, sustained injuries in a road accident and the tribunal has awarded him a compensation of Rs.20,250/= and also exonerated the insurance company from the liability on the ground that no additional premium is paid for the coverage of a pillion rider. Dissatisfied with the quantum as well as exoneration of liability of the insurance company, the claimant has come up in appeal. 2. So far as the quantum is concerned, it can be seen that the claimant was an inpatient in a hospital for 15 days and he had a frontal bone injury. Certainly he would have been forced to spend money for the treatment and only Rs.500/= is seen awarded for medical expenses and so I award Rs.1,000/= more towards medical expenses. Certainly when a person sustains fracture of the frontal bone, there would have been some loss of amenities and enjoyment in : 2 : M.A.C.A.No.39 OF 2010 life for which I award Rs.2,000/=. Therefore the claimant is entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.3,000/=. 3. The next question is regarding the liability of the insurance company. The tribunal has made it clear that Ext.B1 policy is a B policy. B policy means it is a comprehensive policy. By virtue of the clarificatory circular dated 16.11.2009, persons travelling in a private vehicle and pillion rider carried in a two wheeler are covered by the terms and conditions of the standard motor package policy. The conditions therein had come up for consideration before the two Division Benches in the decisions reported in New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Hydrose (2008 (3) KLT 778) and Mathew v. Shaji Mathew (2009 (3) KLT 813). In both these cases, the court had taken the view that terms and conditions of the policy cover the risk of the pillion rider as well. Therefore by virtue of the clarificatory circular coupled with the decisions of the Division Benches, it has to be held that the insurance company is liable. So, the finding of the Tribunal that the insurance company is not liable is set aside and it is made liable. : 3 : M.A.C.A.No.39 OF 2010 4. In the result, the MACA is partly allowed and the claimant is awarded an additional compensation of Rs.3,000/= with 7% interest from the date of order. It is also made clear that the insurance company is made liable and is directed to pay the entire amount with interest including the additional amount within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Disposed of accordingly. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE cl : 4 : M.A.C.A.No.39 OF 2010