IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN FRIDAY, THE 2ND JULY 2010 / 11TH ASHADHA 1932 MACA.No. 278 of 2010() ---------------------- OPMV.2316/2004 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KOZHIKODE .................... APPELLANT(S): PETITIONER IN THE OPMV: ----------------------------------------------------------------- SIRAJ, S/O. ASSANKUTTY, AGED 26 YEARS, OTHANACHAN KANDY HOUSE, NADUVANNUR P.O., NADUVANNUR VIA, KOZHIKODE, BY ADVS. SRI.K.M.JAMALUDHEEN, SMT.LATHA PRABHAKARAN. RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS IN THE OPMV: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1. ASHARAF.K.K., S/O. PARIYAYI, KARUBANKANDY HOUSE, POONATH PO., KOZHIKODE. 2. SAJI.N, S/O. MAMMED T.A., NALAKATH HOSUE,THIKKODI, KOYILANDY. 3. NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LTD., SILVER PLAZA BUILDING, I.G. ROAD, KOZHIKODE. R3 BY ADV. SRI.RENIL ANTO KANDAMKULATHY THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss M.N. KRISHNAN, J. ........................................... M.A.C.A.NO.278 OF 2010 ............................................. Dated this the 2nd day of July, 2010. J U D G M E N T This is an appeal preferred against the award of the Claims Tribunal, Kozhikode in OP(MV)No.2316/2004 whereby the Tribunal has awarded a compensation of Rs.14,000/= to the claimant and directed the 1st respondent to pay the amount and exonerated the 3rd respondent from the liability. So far as the negligent aspect etc are concerned, since compensation has already been awarded, no further question on that point arises as others have not challenged it in the appeal. So the points that survive for determination are (1) whether the claimant is entitled to any enhancement and (2) whether the insurance company is to be made liable. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant as well as the insurance company. The learned counsel also had made available before me a copy of the policy for perusal and also other documents relating to the treatment. The claimant was travelling in a vehicle and it appears that his leg got entangled in the spoke wheel of the vehicle : 2 : M.A.C.A.NO.278 OF 2010 resulting in injuries to him. He was initially admitted in a hospital on 23.5.2004 and discharged on 7.6.2004. Debridment and suturing have to be done and he was discharged with the advice to take antibiotics as well as regular wound dressing. As it developed some complications, he was again readmitted in the Medical College Hospital, Kozhikode on 24.6.2004, had undertone a surgery on 26.6.2004 and was discharged on 1.7.2004. There was a 10% cut on the tendalitis. Grafting was also done and he was discharged on 1.7.2004. He is a coolie by profession. 3. I feel that the following enhancement has to be given to him in this case. On account of the entanglement of the leg in the spoke wheel, the claimant has to be in the hospital as inpatient on two occasions for almost 23 days. There was a big wound and suturing has to be done which later developed into some complications and he had undergone a surgery and there was a cut of 10% on the tendalitis. When these types of injuries happened in the leg, it goes without saying that the movements are restricted. Similarly the working for a considerable length : 3 : M.A.C.A.NO.278 OF 2010 of time would also be affected because one will not be able to put his legs properly especially when the work involved is that of a manual labour. The entanglement of the leg in the wheel of a two wheeler causes real misery and pain and the prolonged treatment is an evidence for the same. I award Rs.5,000/= more for pain and sufferings, Rs.3,000/= more for loss of amenities and Rs.2,000/= more towards loss of earnings by making an additional compensation of Rs.10,000/=. 4. The next question is regarding exoneration of liability of the insurance company. A perusal of the policy would reveal that it is a comprehensive policy. By virtue of a clarificatory circular issued by the Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority dated 16.11.2009 it has been clarified that passengers travelling in a private vehicle and persons carried in a two wheeler are covered under the terms and conditions of the standard motor package policy. The two Division Benches of this Court in the decisions reported in New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Hydrose (2008 (3) KLT 778) and in Mathew v. Shaji Mathew (2009 : 4 : M.A.C.A.NO.278 OF 2010 (3) KLT 813) considered the terms and conditions of the policy and held that it takes in the coverage of a pillion rider without additional premium. Therefore by virtue of these materials the insurance company cannot be exonerated from the liability and therefore it is made liable. So exoneration of the liability is set aside. 5. In the result, MACA is partly allowed and the claimant is awarded an additional compensation of Rs.10,000/= with 7% interest on the said sum from the date of petition till realisation and the respondent insurance company is directed to deposit the said amount as well as the amount already awarded by the Tribunal 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 : 5 : M.A.C.A.NO.278 OF 2010