IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 5TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 14TH KARTHIKA 1931 MACA.No. 557 of 2009() ---------------------------------- OPMV.2438/2004 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KOTTAYAM .................... APPELLANT(S): ----------------------- NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. REP. BY ITS MANAGER, REGIONAL OFFICE, 3RD PARTY WING OMANA BUILDING, PADMA JUNCTION, KOCHI-35. BY ADV. SMT.RAJI T.BHASKAR RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. SHIJO K., KOOTHRAPPALLY ROAD VACHOOCHIRA PO, KOLLAMULA VILLAGE PUTHENPARAMBIL, KUMARAKOM PO,KOTTAYAM. 2. SURESHKUMAR V.R, VALUCHIRAYIL THEKKUMBHAGOM, THRIPOONITHURA. 3. SUJAKUMARI, KOLLARKULATHIL KUMBANADU PO, THIRUVALLA. R1 BY ADVS.MR.PHILIP T.VARGHESE, MR.THOMAS T.VARGHESE. THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ORDER ON IA. NOS. 682 & 683/2009 IN MACA. NO.557/2009 CLOSED 05.11.2009 SD/- M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE tss M.N. KRISHNAN, J. ........................................... M.A.C.A.No.557 OF 2009 ............................................. Dated this the 5th day of November, 2009 J U D G M E N T This is an appeal preferred against the award of the Claims Tribunal, Kottayam in OP(MV)No.2438/2004. The claimant sustained injuries in a road accident and he has been awarded a compensation of Rs.36,500/= with 7% interest. The insurance company has challenged the award on the ground that the policy does not cover the risk of a pillion rider and therefore, it is entitled to be exonerated from the liability. 2. The Tribunal considered that point in para-15 of the award and observed that since the policy is not produced, the company is labile. But, in the appeal, the learned counsel for the insurance company has produced a copy of the policy, which appears to be a package policy. Just because one policy is a package policy or a comprehensive policy, it does not ipso facto conclude that any person is covered under the policy. There are two types of approach to this matter. One by finding whether there is : 2 : M.A.C.A.No.557 OF 2009 additional premium paid for the coverage and secondly, whether there are conditions in the policy which makes the insurance company liable. The two Division Benches of this Court in the decision reported in New India Assurance Co.Ltd.v. Hydrose (2008(3) KLT 778) and in Mathew v. Shaji Mathew (2009(3) KLT 813) did have an opportunity to consider the conditions and had rendered a decision on the point. So everything depends upon the conditions of the policy which unfortunately is neither before me nor before the court below. Therefore, the award so far it relates to the inter se liability between the owner and the insurer is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the Tribunal with a direction to permit both the parties to produce both documentary as well as oral evidence in support of their respective contentions and then dispose of the matter in accordance with law. The parties are directed to appear before the Tribunal on 11.12.2009. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE cl : 3 : M.A.C.A.No.557 OF 2009 : 4 : M.A.C.A.No.557 OF 2009