IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 9TH MARCH 2010 / 18TH PHALGUNA 1931 MACA.No. 2050 of 2008() ----------------------- OPMV.287/2003 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, IRINJALAKUDA .................... APPELLANT(S): PETITIONER IN O.P MV: ------------------------------------------------------------ ANNAM, W/O. KAPPANI VAREED, PALIKKUNNU DESOM, VARANDARAPPILLY VILLAGE AND POST, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADVS. MR.P.V.BABY, MR.A.N.SANTHOSH. RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS IN OP MV: ------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. M.D. LONA, S/O. MALIEKKAL DEVASSY LONA, KUTTANELLOOR.P.O. 2. JOSE, S/O. VAREED, PAPPANI HOUSE, VARANDARAPPILLY.P.O. 3. NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., AMBICA ARCADE, M.G. ROAD, THRISSUR. THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss M.N. KRISHNAN, J. ........................................... M.A.C.A.No.2050 OF 2008 ............................................. Dated this the 9th day of March, 2010. J U D G M E N T This appeal is preferred against the order of the Claims Tribunal, Irinjalakuda in OP(MV)No.287/2003. The claimant has been awarded a compensation of Rs.22,700/= and liability has been cast upon respondents 1 and 2. The insurance company is exonerated from the liability. Challenging the exoneration of iability as well as the quantum, the claimant has come up in appeal. 2. Though all the respondents are served, they had not appeared before this Court. A perusal of the award would reveal that the claimant was 67 years old working as a housemaid and that she had sustained fracture of the patella and supported by medical disability certificate of 9%. The percentage of disability has not been taken into consideration by the tribunal, but it has awarded a sum of Rs.5,000/= towards loss of amenities and enjoyment in life. 3.When at the age of 67 a person sustains fracture of the patella, her difficulties will increase day by day and : 2 : M.A.C.A.No.2050 OF 2008 therefore I think this is a fit case where Rs.5000/= more can be awarded towards loss of amenities and enjoyment in life. So, I enhance the compensation by Rs.5,000/=. 4. The next question is regarding the coverage. Admittedly the vehicle is covered by a comprehensive policy. As per the clarificatory circular issued by the Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority dated 16.11.2009, the passengers carried in a private vehicle and pillion riders carried in a two wheeler are covered by the terms and conditions of the standard motor package policy. The conditions of the policy came up for consideration before the Division Benches of this Court reported in New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Hydrose (2008 (3) KLT 778) and in Mathew v. Shaji Mathew(2009 (3) KLT 813). After considering the clause, the court held that terms and conditions of the policy cover the risk of the person and ordered the insurance company to pay the same. 5. In the light of the clarificatory circular coupled with the rulings, the insurance company cannot be exonerated from the liability. : 3 : M.A.C.A.No.2050 OF 2008 4. Therefore the MACA is partly allowed and the claimant is awarded an additional compensation of Rs.5,000/= with 7% interest from the date of the petition till realisation and the insurance company is directed to deposit the additional amount as well as the amount already awarded 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.2050 OF 2008