IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN FRIDAY, THE 15TH JANUARY 2010 / 25TH POUSHA 1931 MACA.No. 2025 of 2008() ----------------------------------- OPMV.1458/2002 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, IRINJALAKUDA .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER IN OPMV: --------------------------------------------------- JAISON, S/O.POULOSE, PUTHUSSERRY- KUMMANANCHERRY HOUSE, GANDHIGRAM DESOM, IRINJALAKUDA VILLAGE AND POST, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.P.V.BABY, MR.A.N.SANTHOSH. RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS IN OPMV: ------------------------------------------------------------- 1. NIRISH. K.F., S/O.FRANCIS, KANDAMKULATHY HOUSE, MADAYIKONAM VILLAGE AND POST. 2. ROY, S/O.DEVASSY, AKKARAKKARAN HOUSE, GANDHIGRAM, IRINJALAKUDA. 3. THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD., VELLANIKKARAN BUILDING, MAIN ROAD, IRINJALAKUDA. R3 BY ADV. MR.VIJU THOMAS, SMT.M.MEENA JOHN. THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15/01/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs. M.N. KRISHNAN, J. ........................................... M.A.C.A.No.2025 OF 2008 ............................................. Dated this the 15th day of January, 2010. J U D G M E N T This is an appeal preferred against the award of the Claims Tribunal, Irinjalakuda in OP(MV)No. 1458/2002. The claimant while travelling as a pillion rider in a motor bike sustained injuries and the Tribunal has awarded him a compensation of Rs.12,700/= and exonerated the insurance company from the liability on the ground that the policy does not cover the risk of a pillion rider. Challenging the quantum as well as the liability, the claimant has come up in appeal. 2. Heard the learned counsel for both sides. Let me first consider about the liability of the insurance company. Admittedly the vehicle was covered by a package policy. By virtue of a circular issued by the Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority dated 16.11.2009, it is clarified that the passengers in a private car and pillion riders travelling in a two wheeler are covered by the terms and conditions of the standard motor package policy. The terms and : 2 : M.A.C.A.No.2025 OF 2008 conditions of the standard motor package policy came up for consideration before the two Division Benchs of this Court reported in New India Assurance Co.Ltd. v. Hydrose and Mathew v. Shaji Mathew (2009 (3) KLT 813). In both these cases, the court held that by virtue of the terms and conditions of the policy, the pillion rider is covered. So, the finding of the Tribunal that the insurance company has to be exonerated from the liability is incorrect and therefore it is set aside and it is made liable. 3. The second question is regarding the quantum. A young man aged 28 years sustained a crush injury on the right hand which on radiological investigation revealed that he had sustained a compound fracture of the proximal phalanax of the 5th meta carpal. The treatment was as an inpatient for 7 days and review was conducted till a month and thereafter he was advised to go for Physiotherapy. So, there was a little prolonged treatment for him. When a person's right little finger gets crush injury with a compound fracture certainly it will cause excruciating pain and at least there will be temporary disability and loss of : 3 : M.A.C.A.No.2025 OF 2008 amenities for a considerable length of time. I am of the view that he would not have been in a position to do the work for two months. So, I enhance the compensation for loss of earnings by Rs.1,000/=, pain and sufferings compensation by Rs.1,000/= and award Rs.3,000/= towards loss of amenities making it Rs.5,000/= as additional compensation. In the result, the MACA is partly allowed and the claimant is awarded an additional compensation of Rs.5,000/= with 7% interest on the said sum from the date of the petition till realisation. It is also made clear that for the amount awarded as additional compensation as well as for the original amount awarded, the insurance company is liable and they are bound to pay the said amount within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE cl : 4 : M.A.C.A.No.2025 OF 2008