IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 27TH KARTHIKA 1931 MACA.No. 267 of 2009() ---------------------- MVOP.377/2003 of MACT, IRINJALAKUDA .................... APPELLANT(S): PETITIONER ------------------------ OMANA P.B., AGED 59 YEARS, W/O.PONATH VELAYIKUTTY, P.O.KARA, KODUNGALLUR. BY ADV. SMT.JEENA JOSEPH SRI.G.D.PANICKER RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS -------------------------- 1. P.V.SURESH, S/O.PONATH VELAYIKUTTY, P.O.KARA, KODUNGALLUR. 2. ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO.LTD., BRANCH OFFICE, MANAPPATT BUILDING, NORTH NADA, KODUNGALLUR. ADV. SRI.TITUS MANI VETTAN FOR R2 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: M.N. KRISHNAN, J. ........................................... M.A.C.A.No.267 OF 2009 ............................................. Dated this the 18th day of November, 2009 J U D G M E N T This is an appeal preferred by the claimant against the award of the Claims Tribunal, Irinjalakkuda in OP(MV) No.377/2003 whereby the Tribunal has awarded a compensation of Rs.26.900/= and exonerated the insurance company from the liability. Challenging the correctness of the said finding, the appeal is preferred. 2. After perusing the award, I find that the claimant was hospitalized thrice for a total period of 24 days and nature of the injury is cerebral concussion. He was initially treated for ten days as an inpatient. Subsequently again from 4.10. 2002 to 6.10.2002 and from 15.10.2002 to 23.10.2002 Certainly this would have affected her amenities and therefore, I award an additional compensation of Rs.5,000/= under that head. 3. The main contention raised in the appeal is regarding exoneration of the insurance company from the liability. The learned counsel for the insurance company in : 2 : M.A.C.A.No.267 OF 2009 fairness at my request had produced a copy of the policy with conditions of the policy. I had perused the policy and it is very clearly seen that it is a comprehensive policy. When I use the word comprehensive policy, I am aware that it does not mean by itself that additional premium is paid for the coverage of a pillion rider. But these type of comprehensive policies are followed by the conditions and the conditions are also made available before me. Section II(i) of the conditions would reveal that the insurance company has undertaken to indemnify the insured in respect of death or bodily injury to any person conveyed in or on the motor cycle provided, such person is not carried for hire or reward. The very same clause came up for interpretation before a Division Bench of this Court in New India Assurance Co. Ltd v. Hydrose (2008 (3) KLT 778) and it was laid down in that decision that by virtue of the conditions of the contract, the insurance company has undertaken to wipe off the liability and, therefore, there need not be any payment of additional premium for the coverage of such person. In the light of this decision and as the policy condition is contained : 3 : M.A.C.A.No.267 OF 2009 in such clause, the insurance company has to be made liable and I do so. 4. In the result the MACA is partly allowed and the claimant is awarded an additional compensation of Rs.5,000/= with 7% interest on the said sum from the date of the petition till realisation. The insurance company is made liable to pay the entire amount awarded by the Tribunal as well as this Court and the finding exonerating the insurance company from the liability is set aside. The insurance company is directed to deposit the said 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