IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 17TH DECEMBER 2009 / 26TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 MACA.No. 601 of 2008() ---------------------- OPMV.1743/2004 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, MUVATTUPUZHA .................... APPELLANT(S): APPELLANT ----------------------- ASMA,W/O. MAKKAR RESIDING AT ALAPPURAM HOUSE, PAIPRA KARA, MANARY P.O.MULAVOOR. BY ADV. SMT.ANEY PAUL SRI.PHILIP J.VETTICKATTU RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENT ------------------------- 1. ABDUL NASAR,S/O. HALEEMA,KADAVIL HOUSE NOCHIMA P.O..EDATHALA ALUVA. 2. AJMAL,S/O. BASHEER VELLAKADU HOUSE PAIPRA KARA MULAVOOR VILLAGE, MUVATTUPUZHA. 3. THE BRANCH MANAGER, THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO.LTD,ALUVA. ADV. SRI.P.JAYASANKAR FOR R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: M.N. KRISHNAN, J. ........................................... M.A.C.A.No.601 OF 2008 ............................................. Dated this the 17th day of December, 2009 REVISED JUDGMENT This is an appeal preferred against the award of the Claims Tribunal, Muvattupuzha in OP(MV)No.1743/2004. By my judgment dated 20th October, 2008, I had enhanced the compensation by Rs.12,500/= with 7% interest. Since the insurance company moved an application for review of the judgment ventilating the grievance that their objection regarding the liability had not been considered, the judgment was reviewed by me. So, the two points that arise for determination in the appeal are (1)regarding the entitlement for enhancement of compensation and (2) regarding the liability of the insurance company. So far as the enhancement of compensation is concerned, the claimant was treated in Mar Baselious Medical Mission Hospital, Kothamangalam as an inpatient for two days from 4.12. 2004 to 6.12.2004 The certificate revealed that She had luxation of four upper incisors and lower four incisors. Suturing was done and there was extraction of luxated teeth : 2 : M.A.C.A.No.601 OF 2008 seven in number. The lady was aged 43 years and the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.4,000/= towards loss of teeth. 2. I find that it is totally inadequate and therefore, I award an amount of Rs.8,000/= more towards loss of teeth. Similarly when a person's 7 teeth are extracted, in a process of time, there would have been some difficulty for her to do physical and manual work and therefore, towards loss of earnings for 6 weeks, I award a sum of Rs.2,500/=. Towards loss of amenities and enjoyment in life, I enhance the compensation by Rs.2,000/= thereby making an additional compensation of Rs.12,500/=. 3. The next question is regarding the liability of the insurance company. Admittedly, the vehicle is covered by a package policy and the learned counsel for the appellant had made available before me the said copy for perusal. It is also seen from para-4 of the award that the policy is a package policy. The Tribunal had extracted conditions of the policy; i.e., Section II(1)(i) wherein by virtue of the terms and conditions of the policy the death or bodily : 3 : M.A.C.A.No.601 OF 2008 injury to any person including occupants carried in the insured vehicle provided such occupants are not carried for hire or reward is covered by the said clause. This clause has come up for consideration before two Division Benches of this Court in the decisions reported in New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Hydrose (2008(3) KLT 778) and Mathew v. Shaji Mathew (2009 (3) KLT 813). In both these decisions, this Court had taken the view that when the terms and conditions of the policy covers the risk, then the insurance company is liable. Over and above, the Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority by its circular dated 16.11.2009 makes it clear that the insured's liability in respect of occupants carried in a private car and a pillion rider carried in a two wheeler is covered under the standard motor package policy. Since the vehicle is covered by a standard motor package policy, by virtue of the circular as well as the terms and conditions of the insurance contract, the company has to be made liable for the amount. The finding of the Tribunal to the contra is incorrect and it has to be set a side and I do so. : 4 : M.A.C.A.No.601 OF 2008 4. In the result, the MACA is allowed and the claimant is awarded an additional compensation of Rs.12,500/= with 8.5% interest on the said sum from the date of the petition till realisation. The respondent insurance company is directed to deposit this amount as well as the amount ordered by the Tribunal in its earlier award, i.e., Rs.17,775/=, with interest 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.601 OF 2008