IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 3RD NOVEMBER 2009 / 12TH KARTHIKA 1931 MACA.No. 884 of 2009() ---------------------- OPMV.1153/2005 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, OTTAPALAM .................... APPELLANT/IST RESPONDENT ---------------------------- KRISHNANUNNI, S/O.KUTTISANKARAN NAIR, MOOLAYIL PUTHANVEETTIL HOUSE, MUTHUTHALA, PATTAMBI. (DRIVER CUM OWNER OF MOTOR CYCLE NO.KL.9.H.8349. BY ADV. SRI.R.VENUGOPAL SRI.R.SREEHARI RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER & 2ND RESPONDENT ------------------------------------------ 1. SREEDAS, S/O.SIVASANKARAN, KOLPULLYTHODY HOUSE, MUTHUTHALA POST, PATTAMBI. 2. THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO.LTD., BRANCH OFFICE 'ANUGRAHA' BUILDINGS, WADAKKANCHERY ROAD, KUNNAMKULAM. ADV. SRI.P.K.BABU FOR R2 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: I.A.NO.1274/2009 IN MACA.NO.884/2009 DISMISSED 3.11.2009. SD/= M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE cl M.N. KRISHNAN, J. ........................................... M.A.C.A.No.884 OF 2009 ............................................. Dated this the 3rd day of November, 2009 J U D G M E N T This is an appeal preferred against the award of the Claims Tribunal, Ottapalam in OP(MV)No.1153/2005. The claimant, a pillion rider of a two wheeler, sustained injuries in a road accident and the Tribunal has awarded a compensation of Rs.14,450/=. It has exonerated the insurance company from the liability and directed the owner to pay the amount. Aggrieved by the said decision, the owner has come up in appeal. 2. Heard. The point in issue relates to the liability of the insurance company. The Tribunal held that the policy is a package policy, but no premium has been collected for the coverage of a pillion rider and therefore, it did not cover the risk of a pillion rider. The Tribunal accepted that contention and extended the principle given in United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Tilak Singh [(2006(2) KLT 884 (SC)]that unless rider premium is paid, the insurance company is not bound to pay the amount. Ext.B3 is the : 2 : M.A.C.A.No.884 OF 2009 policy condition. The policy is a two wheeler package policy. Section 2(i) reads as follows: “Death of 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 the Motor Vehicles Act”. 3. The very same clause came up for consideration before a Division Bench of this Court in the decision reported in Mathew v. Shaji Mathew (2009 (3) KLT 813). This Court in para-17 held that: “Going by the terms of the policy clearly the insurance company has undertaken the liability. In such circumstances, we are of the view that, t he appeal filed by the owner is only to be allowed and we do so. The award is modified and it is ordered that the 2nd respondent in the claim petition will be liable to pay the amount ordered to be paid. We set aside the exoneration of the 2nd respondent and order that the 2nd respondent in the claim petition is also liable to pay the amount. “ 4. By virtue of the said decision, the benefit conferred upon the party in Hydrose’s case is to be extended to this case under the clause referred to above also and in Hydrose’s case, the Division Bench has held that by virtue : 3 : M.A.C.A.No.884 OF 2009 of the terms and conditions of the policy, the insurance company is bound to indemnify as the contract governs the field. Therefore, in the light of this interpretation and consideration given to the clauses mentioned above, it has to be held that the insurance company is bound to pay. 5. In the result, the MACA is partly allowed and the award exonerating the insurance company from the liability is set aside and it is made liable to pay the amount ordered by the Tribunal. If any amount is paid by the owner, let the said amount be reimbursed to him from the amount to be deposited by the insurance company. Disposed of accordingly. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE cl : 4 : M.A.C.A.No.884 OF 2009