IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 9TH DECEMBER 2009 / 18TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 MACA.No. 2696 of 2008(E) ---------------------------------- OPMV.849/2004 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, THODUPUZHA .................... APPELLANT(S): 3RD RESPONDENT: ----------------------------- NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER, REGIONAL OFFICE, 3RD PARTY WING, OMANA BUILDING, PADMA JUNCTION, KOCHI-35. BY ADVS. SMT.RAJI T.BHASKAR SMT.RAJI T.BHASKAR RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONER AND RESPONDENTS 1 & 2 RESPECTIVELY: ---------------------------- 1. BAIJU, S/O.KURUVILA, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS VARAYANNOOR HOUSE, CHAITHANYA JUNCTION, CHAKKUPALLOM KARA, CHAKKUPALLOM VILLAGE, UDUMBANCHOLA TALUK. 2. JINU ABRAHAM, PONPARAYIL HOUSE, CHAITHANYA JUNCTION, CHAKKUPALLOM P.O., CHAKKUPALLOM VILLAGE, UDUMBANCHOLA TALUK. 3. P.V.ABRAHAM, -DO-, -DO-. THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ORDER ON IA. NO.3178/2008 IN MACA NO.2696/2008 DISMISSED 09/12/2009 SD/- M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE tss M.N. KRISHNAN, J. ........................................... M.A.C.A.No.2696 OF 2008 ............................................. Dated this the 9th day of December, 2009 J U D G M E N T This is an appeal preferred against the award of the Claims Tribunal, Thodupuzha in OP(MV)No.849/2004. The claimant was a pillion rider in a motor bike and the Tribunal has awarded him a compensation of Rs.20,100/= and made the insurance company liable on the ground that it is a package policy. Ext.B1 is the said policy. It is against that decision, the insurance company has come up in appeal. 2. It is the contention of the insurance company that though it is a package policy, as no additional premium is collected for the purpose of covering a pillion rider, the company is not liable. Section II(1)(i) reads that in case of death or bodily injury to any person including occupants carried in the vehicle (provided such occupants are not carried for hire or reward) but except so far as it is necessary to meet the requirements of Motor Vehicles Act. This clause came up for consideration before two Division Benches of this Court in New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Hydrose (2008 (3) KLT 778) and in Mathew v. Shaji Mathew (2009 : 2 : M.A.C.A.No.2696 OF 2008 (3) KLT 813). In these decisions, the Division Benches held that by virtue of the terms and conditions of the policy, the insurance company is bound to indemnify. Now, by virtue of a circular dated 16.11.2009 the Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority after considering this clause had issued a circular wherein it is stated that insured’s liability in respect of occupants carried in a private car or a pillion rider carried in a two wheeler is covered under the standard motor package policy. Therefore, in view of the decisions referred to above and also the circular, it has to be held that the insurance company is liable. Therefore, the award does not call for any interference and it is dismissed. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE cl : 3 : M.A.C.A.No.2696 OF 2008