IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 30TH MARCH 2010 / 9TH CHAITHRA 1932 MACA.No. 369 of 2010() ---------------------- OPMV.3368/2001 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER :- -------------------------------------- M.S.PRATAPCHANDRAN, AGED 44 YEARS, S/O.LATE SANKARA MENON, PARAYIL HOUSE, EAST OF MUTHUKULANGARA TEMPLE, TRIPUNITHURA. BY ADV. MR.R.SUDHISH SMT.M.MANJU RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS :- --------------------------------------------- 1. T.K.RAJASUNDARAN, S/O.KUNJAN NAIR, THEKKEDATH HOUSE, NETTOOR.P.O, VIA MARADU. 2. MOHANAKRISHNAN, S/O.RAGHAVAN NAIR, RADHA NIVAS, NEAR IYRATTIL TEMPLE, EROOR.P.O, TRIPUNITHURA. 3. NATIONAL INSURANCE CO.LTD., REP.BY BY ITS REGIONAL MANAGER, REGL.OFFICE, MUTHOOT TOWERS, M.G.ROAD, KOCHI-35. R3 BY ADV. MR.RAJAN P.KALIYATH THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 30/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: M.N.KRISHNAN, J. ---------------------- M.A.C.A No.369 of 2010 --------------------------------- Dated this the 30th day of March 2010 J U D G M E N T This is an appeal preferred against the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Ernakulam in O.P.(MV) No.3368/2001. The claimant, a pillion rider in a two wheeler, sustained injuries in a road accident and the Tribunal awarded him a compensation of Rs.10,000/- and exonerated the Insurance Company from the liability on the ground that the policy does not cover the risk of a pillion rider. It is against that decision, the claimant has come up in appeal challenging the exoneration of liability. 2. The learned counsel for the claimant had made available before me for perusal a copy of the policy. The policy is a comprehensive policy. Now by virtue of the clarificatory circular issued by the Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority dated 16.11.2009, it is made clear that passengers in a private vehicle and persons carried in a two wheeler are covered under the terms and conditions of a Standard Motor Package Policy. Further the said clause has come up for consideration M.A.C.A.No.369 of 2010 -2- before two Division Benches of this Court in the decisions reported in New India Assurance Company Ltd. v. Hydrase (2008 (3) KLT 778) and in Mathew v. Shaji Mathew (2009 (3) KLT 813). In both these decisions, this Court held that when conditions of the policy cover the risk, no additional premium is necessary. Therefore, by virtue of the clarificatory circular, coupled with the rulings mentioned above, the Insurance Company is bound to pay the amount and therefore, exoneration of it from the liability is set aside and it is made liable but it is made clear that it is not bound to pay interest between 5.2.2008 to 22.12.2009. 3. In the result, M.A.C.A. is allowed and the finding of exoneration of Insurance Company is set aside and it is made liable. It is liable to pay the amount within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. It shall not be liable to pay the interest between 5.2.2008 and 22.12.2009. M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE Jvt