IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 1ST DECEMBER 2008 / 10TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 MACA.No. 2763 of 2008() ---------------------------------- OPMV.2438/2002 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, THRISSUR .................... APPELLANT/3RD RESPONDENT ---------------------------------------------- THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO.LTD., REGIONAL TOWERS, KANDAMKULATHY TOWERS, M.G.ROAD, ERNAKULAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS DULY AUTHORIZED OFFICER. BY ADV. SRI.V.P.K.PANICKER RESPONDENTS/ IST AND 2ND RESPONDENTS & PETITIONER: --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. SHAMSUDEEN, S/O.KUNJU MUHAMMED, MENAYIL HOUSE, P.O.PUNNAYOOR, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 2. RAZAK, S/O.KUNJI MUHAMMED, MENAYIL HOUSE, P.O.PUNNAYOOR, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 3. FAISAL, S/O.MUHAMMADUNNI, MACHINGAL HOUSE, PUNNAYOOR, THRISSUR DISTRICT. THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/12/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: MACA.No. 2763 of 2008() ORDER ON I.A.NO.3216 OF 2008 IN MACA 2763 OF 2008 DISMISSED SD/- M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE 1.12.2008. //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE rhs M.N. KRISHNAN, J ----------------------- M.A.C.A.No. 2763 OF 2008 --------------------------------- Dated this the 1st day of December, 2008 JUDGMENT This appeal is preferred against the award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Thrissur in O.P.(MV) No.2438/2002. The claimant was a pillion rider, who sustained injuries in a road accident. The tribunal awarded a compensation of Rs. 29,800/- and directed the Insurance Company to pay the amount. The contention of the Insurance Company is to the effect that though it is a comprehensive policy, no additional premium has been collected for the coverage of a pillion rider and therefore it is not bound to pay the amount. In comprehensive policy, there is a condition under Section II(1)(i), according to which there is a contract to cover the risk of a person carried in a motor vehicle other than for hire or reward. This clause came up for consideration before the Division Bench of this Court in the decision reported in New India Assurance Company Ltd. v. Hydrose and others [2008(3) KHC 522]. The Division Bench held that, when the contract covers the risk of such a person, additional premium is not necessary and the Insurance Company is liable to indemnify. So in the light of the M.A.C.A.No. 2763/2008 -2- said decision as well as the terms and conditions of policy, I also find that the Insurance Company is bound to indemnify. Therefore appeal lacks merit and accordingly dismissed. M.N. KRISHNAN,JUDGE vkm